MP3 Downloads: When is it OK?

Anybody with the smallest wit is aware that all current screamed fears over mp3 downloads have a point of origin at record companies, not artists. That's not to say that some artists aren't worried, but the real fear is from record companies, clinging on to a tired old model, hoping to keep getting money for old rope and scared that artists could, quite easily, pass music directly to their fans, and miss the record execs out entirely. And without their profiteering, music could be cheaper whilst still giving higher revenue to its creator than they currently receive, so both fan and artist benefit. Although that depends on the price, of course; see terrific article by anaglyph.

But, apparently, illegal downloads are already costing the industry a bazillion quid. Based upon the entirely bogus idea that each download represents a lost sale, naturally.

And now a 3-strikes rule is going to be law, because of lobbying pressure from record companies. If found to be downloading music, your internet connection, on the third occasion, could be reduced to the speed of dial-up. That's for everybody in the household that uses the connection, not just the offender. And it means, potentially, 3 song downloads is all it would take. By someone parked outside piggy-backing your wireless.

This is such an idiot law; the really bad offenders will dodge being found out, so none of its supposed intent will really succeed. And, sadly, the Featured Artists Coalition support this. I agree with almost all of what they say, but not this. And sadly, that means I'll be buying no albums by the signatories (nor illegally downloading them).

Which leads to the point: is it ever OK to download mp3s? Well, I think it is. Obviously, willy-nilly downloading of mp3s isn't the greatest idea in the world if you really care about music and want artists to be able to feed themselves long enough to produce another tune, but sometimes, surely? I mean, who are these hypocritical signatories in the FAC? Do they expect me to believe they never loaned a mate a CD, or made a compilation for a friend? It's not really different.

So here are three occasions that will end up with me losing broadband:

1. I own the album but I'm a lazy bugger. I have a lot of vinyl and a gadget to copy albums to mp3s, but of course it has to do this at normal speed and then I have to chop up the files produced. It's not hard, but it's time-consuming. So if someone has effectively already done the conversion, and I bought the album originally, why not use their files? Loss to Artist: nil. Albums that I really love, I've re-purchased on CD for the quality. If I can't do this, then I'll listen to the vinyl rather than get another copy.
   
2. The album doesn't exist, dammit! This would be the case with Boing! by Airhead - it's not produced anymore. I found this on CD eventually but I'd tried to download it before that; no-one was seeding. The point is, where is the issue with downloading this if the record company is stopping me buying it anyway by ceasing production? Loss to Artist: nil. Ironically, the copy I obtained is second-hand, so the artist gets zero of that purchase anyway.
   
3. Testing, testing, is this shit? Downloading songs to see if they're any good. I liked the Mummers mps3, so I bought the CD. I didn't like the Walkmen, so didn't buy that CD. Is there a problem there? Loss to Artist: nil. Long gone are the days when I'd buy albums randomly - if I can't listen to these songs first, I'm not making a purchase just to find out. If I don't download, there is zero chance of the artist getting any revenue.