"Bill" <nowhere@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4FEQa.1783$Mc.159974@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> =Bob= wrote:
> > "I. B. Pickin" <i__b_pickin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:88494a63.0307141056.48503d4c@posting.google.com...
> >> Methinks y'all are missing the point here, regarding why a boycott
> >> should be considered a valid move:
> >>
> > [deletions]
> >
> >> Until and unless they do, not only are *THEY* doomed, but so is the
> >> industry they're so self-righteously trying to "protect" -- and it'll
> >> be at least as much their fault as it is anyone else's.
> >
> > The industry will change, maybe even only after they take a
> > big hit in the bank.
>
> Do you think we'll ever live to see that day? Not with the masses
continuing
> to buy the CDs, as they apparently are (still) doing. (Unless you've
heard
> different...)
>
>
Well, according to the RIAA (I'm paraphrasing, of course..):
1. Everyone's file sharing
2. File sharers don't buy CDs
3. People not buying CDs are crippling the music industry.
4. The music industry is being crippled.
QED
So really, there's no need for a boycott anyway. All anyone has to do is
continue doing what they're doing and the RIAA won't be able to afford to
sue anyone in a couple of years.
Or is it possible the RIAA's mistaken?
...Nah!
Ric
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
|