Quote:
Originally Posted by evil nickname
True. The current situation is what it is, and some artists and record labels are dealing with it better than others. It seems clear to me that things need to change: as I said, filesharing changed the game completly, and the idea that you can hold on tioo the old way of doing things seems completely naive to me.
Equating filesharing with theft is understandable from the the old perspective, but to a whole generation, it's the way the world works now. That's the reality of it. Complaining about it isn't going to change things, and sueing music fans for it doesn't seem to do the trick either. I strongly believe that there is a need for innovation in the entertainment industry.
I don't know what version you've been looking at, the current Dutch text ( translation) says no such thing. The bolded part looks a mashed up version of article 16b, sub 2. But that only applies to "a daily or weekly newspaper or periodical or book or the score or parts of score of a musical work and other works that are reproduced in these works." |
Your source is obviously the official one so I happily stand corrected. Does this mean that you could photo copy a whole book in a shop or library as long as the copy is for your use only? That seems extraordinary!
Actually the book analogy is a good one. Presumably most people would agree that you shouldn't illegally download copies of books free when you should be buying them? I dont see why albums are any different.