On drums...

Kelly's comment is the crux of the whole "stealing music electronically" situation in this day and age. The record companies have nobody to blame but themselves. It's hard to fathom how ignorant and stubborn they were. But nobody is crying for the big record companies just like nobody cries for the big oil companies when they hit a rough patch. But behind the record companies are a lot of smaller artists who did suffer.

The only silver lining from this "fiasco" is that it has made record companies almost obsolete for most artists. They are strictly advertising houses now. So if you are a hugely successful artist, yes you use them for advertising/promotion. But nobody needs them to make a great sounding record anymore. That can now be accomplished in your living room.

"Morals" or "moral fabric" or whatever you want to call it are personal and variable and in a state of flux like they have always been and always will be.

- D.

David, you are surely entitled to your opinion, but I will never understand why people who don't believe in truth continue to advocate for it.

_________________
Gregory

That's a cop out Greg. You do so understand.


quote:Three questions:

Are you suggesting that violators of copyright laws and rights do so because of some sort of a medical or genetic circumstance?
?? You know that is not what I was suggesting. What I was suggesting is that "violaters will violate". To expect them to do otherwise is not realistic
Even if it it legally wrong, don't you think it woul be more convenient for you and I if we could drive at any speed we wish, even if it meant possible harm to others?
The point here was, illegal activity should be policed. To expect everyone to stay under the speed limit because it is illegal to exceed it is not practical.
Who do we charge with keeping alcohol out of the hands of alcoholics?/quote
I do not expect alcohol to stay out the hands of alcoholics. I expect when it becomes a issue of legality in that alcoholics hands, that something will/should be done.
To attempt to clarify, I don't condone the illegal activity of stealing music. And feel for those not receiving what is rightfully theirs for the work performed. I take issue with the person that is appauled at the immoral person who does this and just does not understand why and expects them to stop. That's just confusing to me. Surely when we talk about what is ethical or moral, we have the problem David and Greg are about to have lmao.

Honestly, I go to youtube. How legal can that be? I don't even know how to define what is legal and illegal anymore.
In the beginning it seemed like they had a hold on this, when they went after Napster and others, seemed like it was working. Someone dropped the ball. And the ball took off. It has rolled so far I don't see them getting the ball back.

I wasn't referring to truth at all. I don't equate "morals" with "truth". If you are saying that to be truthful is good moral ground than I would absolutely agree.

- D.

But if there is no moral truth, which is to say, there is no absolute right and wrong, then on what platform do you base the notion of good moral ground?

_________________
Gregory

I don't think I do. Not by principle, logic, or reason.

_________________
Gregory

I think we all can pretty much agree stealing is not a good thing. Should probably leave it at that.

I'm not going to agree, unless stealing is always wrong. It can't be wrong one minute then right the next.

_________________
Gregory

Thanks to Nick for hosting this year's ethics symposium, and thanks to all of this year's participants for coming to a unified conclusion that 'steaing is bad'.

Sincerely hope to see you all at next year's symposium, where the topic will be, "What is stealing?"

_________________
Cliff

River City Trio

What if we did all have the same opinions?

_________________
Gregory