[citation][nom]nullifier[/nom]That's poor logical reasoning, if that is the case, than that essentially vindicates any type of theft because the individual doesn't have the funds to pay for it. Do I think the record labels make way too much of the artist's work? Yes. Digital albums are more than affordable and you can pick and choose songs from albums - not a bad system.[/citation]
Digital album costing the same as jewel case raises questions "how is the price they are asking me determined?" Not only are we talking about monopolists and not only is "monopoly" another (original) word for copyright, but nobody remembers, why the copyright was invented in the first place. And, mind you, it was NOT to protect some corporations, it was for public benefit: creator of some content had limited time monopoly over his/her creation, which should have motivated people to create more. (I'm not sure Mozart would care though, but let's assume they were right)
In EU mentioned monopoly rights (aka "copyright") lasted for 50 years. And one nice corporation has discovered, that, OMG, it wouldn't be able to sell Elvis' music for money anymore! So what's the solution? They've talked nicely to nice polititions. Viola "motivation" for artists/musicians to create their work is proloned to a 100 years.
Sounds just and reasonable, eh?