+ 0 Votes why? w2ktechman 6 years ago For me, if I think it is worth listening to, I dont mind purchasing it. If it is something that I dont want to buy, I can do without it or listen to it on the radio when they play it. No big deal to me. However, I hate the idea of buying something and then being restricted in its use. If I buy a wrench or power tool, I can use it for many things, lend it out for a few days, or whatever. With new music/movies, this is disallowed. And they keep trying to tighten the grip, like buy a new copy to use in the car, and a new one to use in the mp3 player, and a new one for the computer, and.... + 0 Votes reply richelandrews 2 years ago Thanks for sharing this. Maybe some of you hopes to convert YouTube music into MP3. I have here a tool that converts YouTube music into MP3. Here's how, just paste the URL of the chosen music video that you want to convert and in a couple of minutes, it will be converted. No hassle cause its 100 % free!! http://www.flockee.com/static/youtube-to-mp3/?category=youtube-to-mp3-converter + 0 Votes No JamesRL 6 years ago Though some flexibility would be good. If the artist and producer want it to be free, all well and good. If you wrote and book and got someone to publish it, would you want someone to post it on the internet and give it away? Maybe - if it was a book on say politics and getting the message out was more important than the money you get. But most authors write for money. I think fair use would be to allow someone who purchased the article, whether software or a book or music, to make copies for various media that they own. I don't think that any of those copies should be deistributed to others without the express permission of the author. James + 0 Votes Nothing is really free mjd420nova 6 years ago I use the smart recorder of the Creative software that came with the sound card I use. It allows me to record anything I am listening to. I often go to VH1 and pick a genre like cool jazz or reunion(rock) and record what I find interesting. These are streamed in .WAV formats and I record them in 44kc stereo, 16 bit and save as .WAV format. I don't get to choose any selections or order of play so I might listen to 5 songs before I get one to record. I also have to listen to a 30 second advertisment every five songs or so. I then take these selections I've recorded and assemble them to burn on a CD. This can be done with streaming radio stations or any other source. I haven't recorded any new music, it just isn't my bag as most music today is meant for listeners about 40 years younger. I don't sell those CD's, they are just for my personal use in the car or on my home enterainment system. + 0 Votes Eh ? Tony Hopkinson 6 years ago Do you mean chnage their business model ? Mind you iff they did that, it would bee down to the composers, not a bunch of suits. + 0 Votes Who should be the one to really answer that question? Joe_R 6 years ago The person who created the music, or the person who wants to listen to it? + 0 Votes Yes, if the owner, composer, performer and/or producer so desires drowningnotwaving 6 years ago Otherwise it is up to them to determine a fair market price for the product and see if their product competes either on its merits or value proposition. + 0 Votes Time to put up your own answer, Narvash drowningnotwaving 6 years ago Declare your hand. + 0 Votes Music Industry Genera-nation Updated - 6 years ago Never Happen - where is the money in that. Talking voodoo economics there. It would be the artist that could however - like the recent Radiohead album. NOTE: Radiohead are an indi band and have no record company! + 0 Votes That's entirely up to the owner of the rights. CharlieSpencer_Palmetto 6 years ago Be that the creator, the performer, or the distributor, it's entirely a decision of the owner and not of the listener. + 0 Votes No, not the 'music industry' just the controllers. Oz_Media Updated - 6 years ago The RIAA should disappear along with CRIA. In Canada, Socan and so many others can offer artist protection, suport and legal help. No need to make dough off selling an artists music. Many artists now will just completely subterfuge the labels and be quite successful with a little effort of thier own. The labels should just sign and distribute as they do in Europe, out here they want total control and ownership. This results in less money for an artist, less freedom of expression for an artist, tight deadlines thta produce rough material, costly products at the store and worst of all, they own the radio stations and dictate what we must listen to. Now if Judas Priest was not on a label and they released a CD, I would definietly download a copy, but I would also be first inline to buy one too. I KNOW what I am getting, quality recording, quality ebgineering, a decent booklet with lyrics and images etc. Plus, because they actually do play instruments and sing, I would be buying tickets to their shows. No need for a label there.