copyright arguments rarely go anywhere because inevitably one side introduces the "i'm right , there is no debate" card ands begins arguing against points that were never actually made.  It's almost like gun control debates.  both sides tend to spit the same talking points and rebuttals regardless of what is actually said.  i don't think anyone actually argued it was right to steal music.

Rain, as an FYI, I'm not singling you out.  I was being general but I realize it may seem like what i a msaying applies more toward you.  i assure you i feel the same way about the opposite side of the argument whe nit gets into absolutes.  I used to teach a course on copyright and the debates would get intense.  The one thing i took out of dealing with tons of students and lawyers on both sides of the debate was that  few things are clearly as black and white as either side sees it.  As for Prince, i think he is doing a classic case of fighting the fight he can win even thou8gh his real fight is against people he can't win against.  Prince was a poster boy for how an artist can sell tons of records, get lots of critical acclaim and not make nearly as much money as one would think.  Prince's battles with WB resulted in hollow victories at best.  WB made the real money off of him at his peak.  If he had been able to get his true worth from WB, I doubt he would be as angry about such things. Multi-platinum pop stars, particularly urban genres are bootlegged far more than prince.  It is rare a big name rap artist releases an album that does not get leaked and bootlegged months before it hits the shelves.  They don't like it anymore than Prince does, but realize attacking fans, even fans that are wrong, is probably a bad idea.  A couple of big name rappers actually admitted they were bootlegging their own material because they made more money than what they get from record sales.  As said as that is, it does bring up the question of whether artists should focus on the fan thieves or the label thieves.

dubdisciple ... As said as that is, it does bring up the question of whether artists should focus on the fan thieves or the label thieves.

 
I think this is the hard part.
 
But it is also the difference between an original and a copy! The problem is that the legalities occur more on the copies than they do on original musicians. Mostly everyone tries to copy and worship the hits and yeah, these highlight the money a lot more than a band that no one knows that has an album that kinda makes it on the underground, and they need the exposure. All of a sudden, copies and a few boots is ok, because you need all the opportunities for people to see you and get to you, and you are not going to turn down that chance.
 
We're, TODAY, in such a consumerist society, that we have no idea, how much it is hurting YOUR ABILITY, to make it in that environment, that does not want new things, or different things, and too many folks become convinced that the replicant way of life is favorable, and you can not be an outcast!
 
I just do not subscribe to that socialist/democratic drivel! And protecting the rich from further riches is also not my idea of a fair state of government either! It leasves you and I out, and we can never be creative or valuable or have something that we can "sell" to the public.
 
At least in America, this is better, but in Europe? Asia? Africa? Latin America? Forget it! You need that "underground badly, as it is a great show of the actual public sentiment, instead of fabricated numbers that supposedly tell you what is number one and what isn't!

Say, is that a $22 million clown suit you're wearing?