There are two ways of looking at this issue thought the use of analogies, first is the copy analogy and then the open house analogy. The copy analogy works like this, say you go to a Barns&Noble or a Boarders book store and take with you a note pad and a pen, If you go in there and copy quotes and pages is that stealing? Boarders and Barns&Noble have never sued any one over this one that I know of because even if you could make exact copies with a small page scanner the truth is that all you have are just copies, same applies with music, you don’t have the original album and that therefore means that in truth you don’t have the actual product. Artist still make money off of CD sales because fans will still buy them cuz they like the music. Now onto the open house analogy, If I had an Open House and anyone could came in and play video games, listen to music or use my Internet connection to make e-mails then is that stealing? I still paid for the products being used but the people coming into my house never paid for them, is that stealing? Ultimately I agree it is an issue of semantics but the actual concept of it is in no way an infringement. Its not artists who are hurt by this, it is record companies because like all things they are starting to become obsolete. They are forgetting that one of their primary reasons to existence is to help spread an artists work so that way they can develop a fan base and ultimately share the artists music with the world. I ask how can this be done if the only way of doing so is providing it just to people who can afford it?