dsavi writes: Everyone loves free stuff, and in the last ten years "free" has come to mean more than cheap handouts. So when sites like Napster broke through in 2000, they became tremendously popular- With relatively few questions as to the service's legality. Suddenly, someone realized it was "wrong"- Cue the era of good-versus-evil-style ridiculous propaganda, sometimes not only from the pro-copyright side. But ask yourself this: In 50 years, will you tell your (great?)grandchildren that "Back in my day, not only did we live with a 100mbit/s connection, but downloading movies was considered a crime!"? Or do you think that this could be an issue that only is related to the age we now live in, and die out with time? To me, it feels almost like a holy war- Neither side is really right, and both use dirty tactics and most of the time, do not approach the subject intelligently enough, rather jumping on the bandwagon of one or another. Don't get me wrong- Who doesn't love free stuff?- But both sides of any such perceived "debate" go over the top a lot of the time. Maybe what I'm really asking is, do you really believe that sharing copyrighted content is right, that there is no shame in downloading non-free media for personal purposes? Or, conversely, do you really think that consumers should pay so much for something that only costs the music store bandwidth and royalties to the artist, etcetera etcetera?