Crocuta

It's funny how this conversation almost got to the obvious point, but never quite made it. CD-to-HD... that's a copy. That's it, one copy. Legit reason to make a copy of a copy? That shouldn't be hard to answer since we all do it now. HD-to-PPC for one, as Steve pointed out. Also, have none of you ever bought a new hard drive and moved your music files onto it? Oops, now go back and spend tens of hours ripping your CD collection again from scratch. New computer? Same thing. Ever grabbed some MP3s and taken them to work, or dropped them onto your laptop for a trip? Not any more.

Restricted copies from your originals? (Someone mentioned 7 copies.) 1. HD on home computer 2. HD on work computer 3. PPC 4. Portable music player 5. New HD in home computer 6. New PPC ... get the point? How long is it really going to take to use up 7 copies from the original? A year? Two? Say you only do the first 4 and never get a new device. How many CD's do you have? How long did it take you to rip them? Want to do that four times for every CD?

Sorry, but I have no interest in any CD protected in this way. There are options that allow me to make reasonable personal use of the music I've paid for while still protecting music companies from large-scale copying, but this isn't one of them. And, of course, the RIAA doesn't want a fair system; that's why they're being to obtuse about this. This is partly about being scared of massive copying, but it's also that they see an opportunity to use that as an excuse to put themselves in an even better position than before, making you buy more copies more often of the same music. All legal issues aside, I personally will not participate in such a system even if it means I go without new music.

I also feel the need to add that Lee Yuan Sheng is absolutely right that intellectual property is fundamentally different from physical property and that physical analogies do not apply. The RIAA knows it's different. That's why they're so rich. Lawmakers know it's different. That's why it's not 'theft' when you make illegal copies... it's 'copyright infringment'. Economists know it's different. They note that declining average costs of production mean normal optimization rules do not apply. It may be morally and legally wrong to take music you haven't purchased, but it is most certainly not analogous to the theft of physical property.