So you have no Beatles bootleg recordings in your collection? Only Rarities (US and UK versions) and Anthology I,II,III to satisfy any desire for outtakes and unreleased songs?
No purchased used records, tapes, CDs either?
My comment is not a support for downloading (legal or illegal), just probing the full context of your stance.
Bands like the Beatles (apart from the mythmaking of things like $2,000 butcher-shot LP covers, etc.) receive nothing from used sales yet there is NO (zero zip nada) legal resale value for digital downloads.
If it is all about seeing bands paid for every transfer of ownership of a recording, then digital download ONLY would be the model to go with.
As it happens, that's correct.
> No purchased used records, tapes, CDs either?
No purchased-used. I do have some LPs that were given to me by a friend when they cleaned out their record collection years ago and gave everything away.
> My comment is not a support for downloading (legal or illegal), just probing the full context of your stance.
Probe away... it's a Wide Stance™ :)
> Bands like the Beatles (apart from the mythmaking of things like $2,000 butcher-shot LP covers, etc.) receive nothing from used sales yet there is NO (zero zip nada) legal resale value for digital downloads... If it is all about seeing bands paid for every transfer of ownership of a recording, then digital download ONLY would be the model to go with.
Interesting point.
The Beatles themselves are not a good example for me to use for my stance on downloading, except to say that I plan to wait until they get their stuff on legit digital download of some sort, and I can evaluate what portion of that I feel compelled to have myself. My CD->MP3 versions are of the CD mixes, for instance; better mixes might tempt me.
But really, my philosophy derives from the bulk of my collection which is jazz and blues, genres in which the artists were systematically ripped off for decades. For many artists, it's too late to compensate, but I want to do right by the ones that are around.