I'm adding my bit, even though it's not completely related.
The trouble with copyright on music and with copying music, is that once it starts, the fees all go crazy for those who use the music.
For example, I was lead to believe, by my accountant, that the copyright law in Australia allows me, as a business owner that relies on using music (dance studio), to copy all of my music as long as the originals are locked up safely and only the copies are used.
But in the three years since I have commenced this, I have also had to pay 2 differnt yearly lisenses to play music in a public place (my business) and just recently I recieved a different one that requires me to pay for the right to copy music. Naturally, this one I'm not paying.

But in recently talking to other people in the same business as me, there are around 4 more different licenses that I should be paying, and they are all supposedly allowing me to play the music that I need.

This all suggests rampant opportunism, which funnels money into different private and government companies with very little going to the artists themselves, if any. (When You pay these licenses they don't ask for a list of the music you use).

If this system was more regulated, than maybe Napster could exist without it being a problem. A lot of money is being collected and not necessarily going to the ones that deserve it the most.

ding"soap box"dong