Thanks Plunker and Chum Man. I think the industry's behavior simply further alienates the public - who are the consumer/purchasers of music. The best analogy I've heard compares recordings to the public library. The library buys the book, and I check it out and read it. The publisher and author receive their compensation from the sale of the book. The recording industry would by extension close public libraries and have us all buy a new copy of the book.

The most absurd example I heard was where the industry wanted a royalty payment from a barber who played a radio in his barber shop, where customers were hearing songs without payment of royalties! Nevermind that the radio station pays a royalty every time it plays every record on the air for public consumption.

I used to tape my vinyl records for convenience and to have a copy to play in my car. Now I copy CDs and keep the extra copy in my car - lots cheaper in case they are stolen in a car break in.

I'm happy to see musicians compensated for their work; that's fair - altho I've decided not to attend any concerts that charge $80 and more for tickets. Nobody's that good in my opinion. However, the recording industry seems to be making its last stand to protect itself. I've read that with modern electronics and so forth, the industry is becoming obsolete as artists use small and private studios to produce CDs. The only significant service the industry provides nowadays is marketing on a scale larger than any individual or band can. And the internet might even change that.

If the recording industry does become obsolete, the current behavior will have most consumers happy to see its demise.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.