Are Free File Download Services Really Safe

by: Drew Straub
On Monday June 27, 2005 the Supreme Court ruled that Grokster andStreamsoft, two free file download services, were operatingillegally because they were allegedly encouraging illegaldownloads of copyrighted material.Encouraging it...that was what the Supreme Court said. Thesewere free services that were encouraging illegal activity.Would this have happened if they had had paying customers? Inother words, would a paid file download service be better than afree download service?I think so, and here's my reasoning why...If you consider that every dollar paid is like a vote, then itbecomes clear the paid file downloading services are much moreaccountable than free file downloading services.If you follow my metaphor so far, then you may see how a paidfile download service is like an elected official, and a freefile download service is like a dictator.Here's how they differ:1. If an elected official doesn't get enough votes, the electedofficial doesn't get re-elected and is "out of there".2. A dictator doesn't care about votes. A dictator doeswhatever they want. And, if you get hurt by what they do....well, it's YOUR problem.Basically, it's all about accountability.A legitimate business has to make money to survive. If abusiness hurts people, customers will stop buying from thatbusiness and go elsewhere. And, if people stop buying from thatbusiness, then that business is "out of there" (just like theelected official which loses votes).But a free file sharing service can "do what it wants", just likea dictator, and if they even go to the level of encouraging youto do things that are illegal, even lying to you by telling youthat it's perfectly legal... well it's no skin off their nose.It's your problem!Or so they thought...up to now.For the first time, the Supreme Court has made these shady liarslegally responsible for their bad behavior.They got away with it in the past by "advising" people to dothings that were potentially illegal. They rationalized it bysaying "Hey, we aren't the ones actually doing it, so weshouldn't be held responsible."But the Supreme Court has finally cleared this up. They areresponsible, and can now be sued for their actions. Even if theydid it for "FREE"."FREE"... that was the draw that got so many innocent kidsdownloading songs, videos, movies, games, etc. illegally withoutknowing it. The "FREE" file downloading services were justexploiting these kids' ignorance.Paid download services can't afford this kind of behavior. Theylook at this as a business. If they start getting theircustomers in trouble, word gets around pretty fast on theinternet, and their business will become toast!Think of this like NetFlix, who doesn't sell download services,but sends out CDs and DVDs through the mail. What would happento them if they "encouraged" purchasing illegally copied moviesor music from them? Yeah you got it... toast!But the "FREE" file sharing services that are encouraging kids todo this thought they could get away with this indefinitelybecause "they weren't making any money off of it, and after all,they weren't the actual people doing the downloading."Nice legal trickery... good thing it won't work anymore!So... the question still begging to be asked is:"Are paid file download services better than free file downloadservices?"I'll let you take it from here... ;^) About the author:================================================================= Drew Straub invites you check out his new site which he built to help people find the best reviews on MP3 players and the best paid membership services to use to find the music, videos, movies, and games you want legally at: http://mp3.wowshoppe.com=================================================================