Quotes of the Day

Peer-to-peer networks have been the subject of controversy since Napster appeared on the scene several years ago. Record companies are fighting to protect their intellectual properties — the source of artists' livelihoods — while at the same time, the technology for downloading music is advancing faster and faster. The conflict reached a peak recently when the Recording Industry Association of America's lawsuit targets included a 12-year-old girl who had downloaded several songs from the KaZaA media network. What do you think? How can the industry protect its copyrighted material, while still adapting to changing technology?

Please limit your response to 80 words or less. The best entries reflecting the diversity of opinions expressed will be published on TIME.com throughout the week.

Some of your responses:

The record industry should get on the online bandwagon and, for a modest amount, allow fans to download individual songs. I believe that most people who are currently trading files would be willing to pay if the songs were reasonable. The only thing the industry can do to otherwise to curb the illegal trade is to bring lawsuits, as it has done.
Marvin Coston
Bakersfield, Calif.

Fighting online file-swapping would be laughable if they weren't doing it so brutally: targeting kids and college students (who can't afford to challenge the ridiculous lawsuits). File-sharing is not the artist's enemy. Eminem had the most-downloaded album last year. It was also the highest-selling album of the year. Overpriced CDs and a cruel, pointless campaign to alienate fans are the artists' enemy. The RIAA must embrace file-sharing or die (I vote die).
Brian Dollerhide
Wasilla, Alaska

In a nut shell, there is nothing the RIAA "can" do. Sure, for now they can file lawsuits against 14-year-old children until the cows come home, but there will come a point when the hilarity of that situation will in itself discredit the RIAA. It is a losing battle and unless the record industry plans on spending hundreds of millions of dollars employing hundreds of techs to keep one step ahead of the growing peer-to-peer alliance, they may as well just eat the cost they claim to be incurring now. I for one would say it is not the brightest idea to "challenge" our technically talented youth. I am quite sure they are up for this fight.
Jeff Brodzeller
Milwaukee, Wis.

The root problem is, in the words of Joni Mitchell, "the star-maker machinery behind the popular song". The popular music industry produces music with a built-in sell-by date — is it any wonder that people balk at spending money on CDs that will last a lifetime? The answer is more artists, less commercial, and more inspired. Make music we want to keep, and we'll be buying the CDs.
Mark Honman
Durban, South Africa

Downloading is for the most part simple theft; the artists, the labels, the record stores and each of their employees make their livings selling music which they in some way make or distribute. If you stole from a record store you would understand why they had you arrested — why be surprised when they sue you to reclaim the money you steal by downloading? Parents should be responsible because they did not teach their kids that stealing is wrong. They may not have known that downloading was stealing back when Napster first started, but anyone who did not know this since then is criminally ignorant and is fair game.
D.A. Spiz
Tustin, Calif.

Nothing. The RIAA is going to go kicking and screaming into the night, ruining the lives of teenagers and college students until it finally goes broke, and everyone's surprised that there's still music and still musicians. Here's a better plan: There are 45 million file-sharers in the US. Why don't we elect some legislators who aren't bought by big business and get them to rewrite IP and patent laws to something a little less draconian?
Josh Block
Boulder, Colo.

How can record companies — or any American company — even suggest that their consumers be guided by integrity and honesty when corporate America outdoes itself each week in reaching new heights of greed and dishonesty? In the market struggle between producers and consumers, wouldn't it be a sign of stupidity for consumers to adhere to a Geneva Convention-style code of conduct while corporations are allowed to pursue any legal or illegal means to maximize profits and re-write the code?
Dan
Centennial, Colo.

RIAA must do what it would not do with Napster: distribute low price music online. And they know perfectly well that, even if lawsuits could stop the sharing, people would never go back to buying CD's. They are just trying to buy two or three years in which to keep milking the high price CD cow, before giving it up. But even this limited attempt is going to fail.
Alberto Rezza
Italy

Give up trying to protect copyrights and build a business model that embraces the free nature of the digital goods. Most businesses would kill for something that can be freely reproduced and redistributed. They call it "free promotions". The music industry needs to realize they're not in the business of selling "songs". They're in the business of selling a musical experience and the songs themselves can freely promote money-making goods and services such as concerts, fan clubs and related merchandise.
Michael Masnick
Foster City, Calif.

The record industry needed to strike a deal with Napster to co-opt its user base into a high quality pay-for-play service. Now that they have forced the users into a plethora of decentralized services, there is no good solution left. The recording industry will now continue to hemmorhage money for quite some time.
James Sweet
Rochester, N.Y.

Answer — stop overcharging for CDs. In a retail outlet in Ireland, a standard album release costs anywhere from 18-25 euros ($20-28 approx.). The same CD can be purchased at an online store for 14 euros ($15 approx.). So where does the extra 28-60% difference in price go? To the artist? Not! The large record company does not care about the artist; their primary concern is to their shareholder. I use file sharing for rarities, for songs released as singles, B-sides, etc. and occasionaly for albums. But I will still purchase an original work if the price is right and the artist is worth it.
Aidan Kelly
Ireland

The idea that file sharing is the only cause of the decline in record sales in the last few years is ludicrous. The industry has continued to alienate fans through a recession with high prices, cheap gimmicks, and a lack of support for quality artists. They have brought this on themselves and only exacerbate the situation with lawsuits. Accept it. Music was meant to be shared.
Heath Huff
Texas

Quite simply, they can stop trying so hard. Ever since the Napster debacle, I've tried my best to steer clear of purchasing music owned by RIAA member corporations. Not only have I discovered great bands from a large number of independent labels (and yes, bought their CDs), but I've avoided putting money into the pockets of an organization that refuses to work with programmers to build a practical solution, and instead insists on using counterproductive bully tactics.
J.T. Stanton II
Fairfax, Va.

Last Week's Question: Should the U.S. and Saudi Arabia maintain an alliance?