Thanks ok. I disagree. I believe you can make a copy for yourself, but whatever
back to the original question,
a friend copying your copy for himself is not ok, because you are distributing it. is that easily proved, nope.
Disagree..
you say you are distributing .. the the question stated "if i play on my machine and a friend copy on thier own machine" im not distributing im playing.. i maybe be facilitating distribution or i maybe just be listening to music.. but im defaintely not distributing. IT will also be a junk copy and thus is a mute point.
aditional side note
Now if i use a tape to tape machine and make a copy of my copy and hand my friend the tape i may be ditributing but its not for profit or on a large scale, its a "mix tape"... a common society accepted practice. The cost of my pirated copy is already covered in the fee i paid when i purchased my blank tapes... and thus may be considered unethitical by some but is not illeagle. Now the artist may never see a penny of the fee i paid on my blank media in which case he needs to address the recording industry for not ditributing him/her a share.
The whole problem comes when you talk about didgital copies veses physical copies. If i make a mix collection of digital media ..and pass to my friends .. not only will they be perfect copies, I will not have paid a blank media fee and i can also do it extremelt easily and thus will transfer a much larger quantity of music than i ever would have via physical meida .. where each and every recording took alot of time.
The solution is simple and widley known... people only pirate things when the price does not refect the percieved value. People would willing pay $2 a month for an all you can eat music subscription. The recording industry knows this but thats a vast reduction in profits .. so they will fight to milk the fat cow as long as they can. And at the end of the day that is all this is about. The right to charge extreme prices and to create a shortage where non should exist.
