Robin Hood Philosophy?

No, I agree with you, you do deserve that. It's a free market and market forces dictate the price on the second-hand market - as with anything in life, if someone is willing to pay X for something then you're well within your rights to sell it for anything up to and including X!

Thinking about it, perhaps there is a difference. Uploading music has, in a legal sense, a different purpose than that of a buyer who let's his friend borrow the CD as he is not the one who is copying the music. Indeed, the person who buys the CD and then uploads it is deliberately sharing that music with as wide an audience as possible. So perhaps a court would view the two things differently?

Is it okay to let someone copy a CD from a friend who bought that CD? If it is, is it equally legitimate to let the person who copied the files then share them with another person? And then that person with another and so on and so on.

I've kind of argued my own point here, but I personally don't see a distinction (in moral terms) between the two, but perhaps a court of law would (certainly in legal terms).

As far as I understand it you are allowed to make a copy of a CD you have purchased - and keep. If you subsequently sell the CD you should also delete the copy you have. And if the copy you have made of the CD is from a CD you borrowed from a friend then it's just the same as illegally downloading it from the 'net - you never purchased the music originally and therefpre you do not have the right to own a copy of the music in any form.

Weren't the poor people in the Robin Hood story unjustly taxed and given bad pay and that's why he steals from the rich? Not just because they have no money? (sorry if this seems a little off from the downloading thing, but it has to do with my answer)

That's part of the modern myth, though it's worth noting that this also entails the fact that it was the Saxons that were overtaxed by the "evil" Normans, so there's a strong nationalist element in there as well.

(While there is no academic consent, the message we get from the earliest ballads though is the Robin was just another outlaw. Rather more Dick Turpin-ish than a do-gooder).

That's cool, but...I...don't...really....care....I just....had to....name... it....something else.

Oh, my bad! Sorry.

Me, growing old? I certainly hope so! Young people these days are hard to please!

I imagine this said in a James Earl Jones voce

How can the CD companies count people who download as a lost revenue, who wouldn't buy the CDs in the first place anyway?

While this is a slightly different case, I totally agree with this guy (Bill Thompson):

"Like almost every technically-competent internet user of my acquaintance I've used BitTorrent to get my hands on a copy of a TV show that I missed, taking advantage of the kindness of strangers who bothered to record and upload the shows for fans because the companies that make and broadcast them choose not to.

However I also go out and buy the DVD box sets as soon as I can.

And I don't feel like a criminal, because I don't see why downloading a copy of a show that someone else has recorded should be seen as a breach of copyright while recording it myself onto a DVD is not. "

It's not Ceiling Cat you have to worry about, it's Basement Cat that has your number!

Oh I don't doubt it. As I've promised Timmer on many occasion, we're gonna meet up by the unreachabley high cupcake table in LolHell.

Mutual lack of lolfaith.

For doubting the power and glory of the Maker.