[evil nickname]

Well, agreed :)

Originally Posted by little_dancer

Here's where you and I differ, though, Evil.
I will buy these copy-controlled Cd's for artists like Meat Loaf, Tom Waits, and my other favorite artists. They are artists, and I do not believe that the public has the right to illegally copy their work.

I never said I didn't buy them. I got some (CHSIB included). And I also never said that the public has the right to illegally copying CDs, or other copyrighted work for that matter.
I was making the case that copy corruption does not allow me to make legimate copies for private use. I've encoded almost all my CDs so I can listen to them more easily on my PC - and that is where I play music the most. According to Dutch law, that's entirely legal. I just don't like my rights being taken away...

Originally Posted by little_dancer

(although there are allready downloadable programs to steal the information from the disc, in a way that removes the errors)

I strongly object to the word 'steal' in this context. Copies made for private use, parctice or study are legal (The Netherlands again), so it's not stealing.

Originally Posted by little_dancer

Here's the thing, I feel you're missing. People are stealing music. Whether or not this affects sales is really not relevant-(to my point, obviously it is relevant to the artist, and the record company) what is relevant is the fact that people seem to believe that they have the RIGHT to take music for free.

I never touched on the 'stealing' thing for, imo, a good reason. It's quicksand. I do download music from the internet. Like most people do. However, I mostly download music to 'pre-listen' an album I'm interested in. If I like it, I buy it. If I don't -- why keep it? This is what *I* do. And I don't expect a lot of people do the same.
Technically, I'm still a 'thief', since I take copyright material, which is most likely made available without the copyrights-holder's consent. Although it may not be completly honest/legal, but I think that morally I'm doing pretty well.

Originally Posted by little_dancer

Artists copyright their work because they make their living on what they create. [...] I really can't blame them for taking any measures that are available to them to prevent music piracy, [...] Copy-protection is annoying, but this is a case of a few bad apples spoiling it for everybody. If people are willing to steal music, the rest of us are going to have to put up with the incovenience of copy-protected CD's

Yes, artists make their living of their works (be it music, paintings, or whatever). And no, it's not wrong to protect your income, but I don't believe that copy protection is the ultimate answer. There are, and always will be, ways to circumvent them. The added inconvienance of 'CDs' that aren't proper CDs, and therefore will not play on all CD-players, is in my not so humble opinion only resulting in more people eventually not buying CDs. Why buy something that should come with a warning: "You won't be able to play this album with your discman, auto-radio, PC, and other non-standard CD-players (and some assorted standard CD players). Also you won't be able to make digital audio files for use on your portable audio player." I hardly use my regular CD-player, and once there are portable audio devices which support Ogg Vorbis, I'm definatly buying one. So why should I buy something I won't be able to use in the way I want to / that is of not much use to me due to the way its designed? I might just as well download it for free from the internet.

And finally, slightly OT, but FYI:
People don't have to copyright anything. This is done automatically if you create 'a work of art, literature of science' (Dutch Law again, but I'd be surprised if that isn't the international approach). This reply, is copyrighted by me, I don't have to add a '©' or nothing. That's just how it works.
And shareware is software, that is distributed free of charge for testing. If you decide you like the software, and continue to use it, you are legally required to pay a registration fee.

William
[jeez... these kinds of posts take forever to write]

[edit: Shadow was posting in the time it tookme to type up all this]

Originally Posted by shadow1000001

I am not the type of person to upload files so the copy controling is not a real issue for me. The only way to stop it is to go after the file sharing sites themselves, not the record companies.

Copy protection / disc corruption may become an issue for you once you change your equipment, or a new version of protection comes out which won't work with your equipment. Just that it isn't one now is no reason just to dismiss it. That's like saying "screw the ecosystem, I'll be long gone when the bubble finally bursts".
And yes, rolling up the fileshare-sytems would propably do the trick, although I don't believe that will ever happen.