Thinking about selling my CD collection = MP3

Just think of it this way: You get contracted to develop a software database grading solution for high school teachers. You get an advance, and the software company covers all of your expenses, but all of the money you recieve and that is spent on the project will get recouped out of royalties, which is where you are actually going to make your money.

So you finish your program, and the company releases it. Come to find out teachers are buying a copy, then copying the disc and selling the used copy cheap to their friends. Not only is this cutting into your paycheck (which doesn't even come until the software company has recouped all of the money they spent on the project and paid to you), but it's also like people are stealing your hard work. They are selling the copy they bought, while still using the software. To make matters worse, the software company won't hire you again unless a certain number of copies are sold. And even if they do hire you again (or force you to write another program as per your contract), if they didn't make all of their money back from the first program (which would mean you didn't make ANYTHING on the backend), the rest of the money from the first project is recoupable from the royalties from the second project. So essentially (and this happens quite often) you busted your butt to write a great program, had people basically stealing it, and then wound up owing money to your employer.

When you buy a CD you are buying the music contained on it for your own personal use. The people that wrote the songs get a piece, the artist gets a piece, the producer gets a piece, the label gets a piece, and the store gets a piece. By keeping a copy of a disc that you sell you are not only stealing, but you're devaluing music. Does anyone wonder why the current dearth of good new artists coincided almost directly with the rise of downloading and technology that made it easy to copy CDs with little to no loss. Labels are losing money, and thus are unwilling to take risks on anything but the most derivative music that's sure to sell to masses of teenagers. CONSUMERS are responsible for where the music industry is. It's a business, and they will do what they have to to make money, including cutting risk.

What's the quickest way to a more varied pool of new, talented, UNIQUE artists? For everyone to go out and get their music legally.

Again, it's a little disheartening seeing so many supposed music lovers who don't even think twice about contributing to the widespread screwing of recording musicians (this applies particularly to those who aren't selling out arenas and selling millions of albums). As far as I'm concerned we all need to do everything we can to get the artists that we like paid, or else the labels are going to stop supporting good, original music all together in favor of groups that have a proven track record of making tons of money. I hear people complain daily about the lack of quality music and anything but cookie cutter bands coming from the big labels, and the reason why we got here is because the types of artists we like aren't making money for the labels (which means the artists REALLY aren't making money). This is really much more of an ethical question than a legal one. The cops aren't going to bust down your door for ripping your CDs and then selling the originals, but you're not exactly helping the artists or our cause either.

The RIAA has NOT created a red herring about artists. It's true that the record labels make the vast majority of the money from each CD sale, but the fact is that artists need CD sales that much more in order to make money. As I said above, if a CD fails to sell enough copies to recoup all of the costs associated with recording, manufacturing, and marketing the album, an artist can end up OWING the record company money at the end of the day. Furthermore, every time a label takes a risk on an artist who isn't just a rehash of all the other drivel on the market (in other words supports an artist that is more likely to be an audiophile favorite), they're less likely to take any more chances if the venture doesn't pan out. Like any other BUSINESS, the recording industry is all about profit, and if you don't put your dollars behind your opinion and tastes, you're going to see yourself under, or god forbid un-represented in the market. The only way we can really effectively shape the course of the recording industry is by buying what we like. Nobody is going to release the records you want to hear unless there's a sizable market, and unless you're happy with limited release, overpriced audiophile pressings as your only source of your favorite music (which will also go away if not supported), you should be doing all that you can to speak your mind through your purchases.

Again, please don't do more to dilute the market and devalue what brings us all to this forum and others like it - music - by selling your CDs but retaining the music that they hold. Would you want someone purchasing whatever product or service you offer, and then selling it while retaining a duplicate?

I don't see how A and B are any different. In both cases two copies of the recording are out there and only one has been paid for. The artist hasn't been compensated fairly, and hasn't been properly credited in either case.