This started out a comment response to Jax’s blog who basically blogged her agreement with this blog post that is attempting to make a case against copying music. The original analogy in the post against copying music talks about a distributor who doesn’t lock up at night and has their product stolen with the aid of various other companies that charge for services such as maps, roads, or whatever else. This analogy doesn’t stand up because the distributor doesn’t loose any product.
An artist’s official online Youtube channel, Hulu, Netflix, band website, or whatever is distributing data so it can be reproduced and displayed by your computer, X-Box, Wii, TiVo, etc. Taking a step back to talk about physical media doesn’t really change the story since music is data. Copying data comes standard issue on every computer since forever because that’s what computers do. Fact of the matter: Making something easily accessible means making it easy to produce. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. I have the same feelings for entertainers and artists that I do for any producer of a easily replicated product that everyone likes enough to copy but not enough to wait for innovations or pay for it.
I made another analogy of my own and I got it to a point that it was pretty solid. But it was also overly elaborate. It contained nanobots that could keep pastries fresh forever as long as people didn’t swallow which lead to people copying every kind of food including raw meat products. In the end butchers and food artisans get the shaft since the copy machine replicated structure. The bakers and other innovators aren’t as hard hit because they their product can adapt as time goes along