This is backed up by a recent study, and I have no disagreement there.

However, he tries to use this argument as justification for pirating music, and that simply does not work.

If we agree that the work of musicians is their own property that they can license or sell as they wish, then pirating music is stealing, plain and simple.

The idea that music piracy is a “victimless crime” is moot; it’s like saying that stealing from someone who is really rich should be legal because they probably won’t notice.

It also may be true that quick, easy and vast distribution of music is good for artists. I agree with this point, but again, this relates little to the legality of piracy.

This gets back to the fact that the artist can do what they want with their music, including give it away for free (which some, like Radiohead, already have). The bottom line is it is their choice, not yours as a listener.

The most disturbing part of the article is the ridiculous analogies.

While everyone jaywalks sometime in their life, we also can agree that we understand that the law was created with safety for the pedestrian in mind.

Not many people consider it a moral dilemma every time the road is clear but the red signal is on. But when you ask a person whether it is right or wrong to steal, you know what to expect. Maybe instead people should ask themselves the definition of theft.

Alan Katz

mechanical engineering graduate student