> Well, whether you knowingly have 2000 or only 2 or 3
> pirated songs in your collection in either case it is still
> against the law. Is one worse than the other? Probably,
> as I would think it isn't as bad if someone has spent *some*
> money on music

True. Doing 5mph over the posted speed limit is illegal, just as is doing 50mph over the limit.

Its the difference between abiding by the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law.

I abide by the spirit of the law, but hardly the letter.

Also, I refuse to buy an entire CD when I like only one or two tracks off it. Until the recording industry has a way that I can buy only what I want, and that I can ensure that more profit goes to the artist, I will continue this way. If I could PayPal the money directly to the artist, you can be sure the net effect for them would be better than had I bought their work through their greedy label.

Something that is worth money to me is worth money to me. If I would never have bought a whole CD from which I have one track downloaded, is that a lost sale? No. Would I care if I accidentally deleted? A bit, but not enough, because it held little or no worth to me.

Laws are guidelines that happen to be explicit so that there is some line drawn against which to make judgement and so that stupid people do not misinterpret them. How far one deviates from the guidelines determines if they are a criminal.

I'll continue to do a small percentage over the posted speed limit, and I will continue to have a similar percentage of my music not owned.