Wasn't that corny? In a lot of ways, a bunch of it seems clear, regardless of how I lean.

Still, I did ignore the idea of using illegal sources to watch a show that you missed last night/earlier in the day. Personally, I consider it fair play - it's the same as time-shifting, in spirit.

But look at it this way, too: when I watch much of Pixar's work, Evil Dead 2, Beautiful Creatures, Brick, The Matrix, Raiders of the Lost Ark - I'm happy to pay for that. They should get money, and make more like those. I was happy to wait to pay $3 to rent Tromeo & Juliet so my friend and I could enjoy incredibly funny trash. It doesn't sound right to have it all, always, free.

From a legal perspective, I think it's illegal. In particular, I think it is illegal *by the standards of our times.* Shows go up on Hulu the next day (although not always), or on e.g., Time Warner's free on-demand channel dedicated to tv. Or you can buy them relatively cheap (it's easiest to argue one ep instead of the whole run, right) on Amazon and ITunes. $1.99?

All it takes is a few extra minutes to find most shows that you "just missed" for free. And fast. I liked it enough to write an article about exactly that. I don't wanna sound like that Lesko guy from the informercials, but there's free legitimate video everywhere.

Or pay a little for it. Or wow - it shouldn't be that hard to wait for other stuff, right? Make plans, exercise, date, read a good book. It's 20-47? minutes for most shows, 90-something for most movies. Use up that time later. It's why I haven't watched The Wire (or a bunch of shows recommended that strongly). I have time to get old and watch "good junk."

I also make an exception for stuff like not being able to find a subtitled version of a kung-fu movie you love. In that case, I might even get some way to watch it properly, and be thrilled about it. I'd pay for a real copy when it's available though.

Once everything becomes that widely accessible, quickly and legitimately, for a relatively cheap cost (per ep/song/movie), I think the debates about openness start to approach bs. If I ever got an album for free, perhaps, I made damn sure to buy everything that I loved.

I made exceptions for everything that's freely released, of course. I love promo mp3s...

And I never had a problem with the idea of using the net to "try shows free" to figure out if you want ot watch more of them. Still, I think that we could argue more about real copyright issues - how long it lasts, use in criticism/parody videos, whether "moral rights" should exist, or getting good song sampling done... Seriously, do you know that you couldn't get "Paul's Boutique" made now? That is freaking horrific.

For straight-up "I wanna watch something now" purposes, it starts to sound like some folks wants a license to steal. Other arguments exist, though - like if someone stole/broke all your cds...

I don't think that the biz model for a lot of entertainment is especially great. It can suck, actually. And it's not handling the new times well =) Complaining about mixtapes (or CDs) is one thing, but if one mix sells 80-thousand copies on little overhead - being uptight about that starts to sound like a valid response to me...

Unless you're talking about "the grey album," but the only guys that complained (j-z's label) were same ones that made the album available for mixing. That just sucked of them. That album is a legitimate case for "theft" then, if it were theft.