It is true that copyrights are important for musicians, since music is not a form of tangible art, like a painting, that can be sold for a certain amount of money that profits the artist. However, modern technology is now at a degree that “copying” music is no longer comparable to the old days when people could still create pirate cassette tapes or CDs. Now that all forms of music can be converted into digital files and posted on the Internet, enabling access all over the world, keeping reins on creative content is becoming increasingly difficult. It is futile effort to keep other people from copying one’s contents is because in many cases, the maker of content may not even know that the contents were “stolen” and one cannot track down each and every case unless someone who “stole” the contents creates something that becomes hugely popular. There is also a fine line that makes it very vague as to whether an artist was inspired by another, or simply copied it. A fair use defense on part of the content user can also be insufficient in some cases. For instance, if some person used another source to create music for fun, but then a huge company wants to buy that song for an advertisement, would the artist’s initial intention for non-commercial use prevail in court? Continuing discussions on whether or not we should or should not protect copyright or negotiating the extent of copyright protection is a neverending tale. Instead, music makers and technology developers must think of more fundamental, truly technical methods on how digital files can “stamp” dates and creators as well as developing comprehensive Web portals based on practical business models so that music makers can sell their music directly to listeners (not only MP3 downloads, but also blog stream-links) and receive their dividends. Musicians must face the fact that the Internet is here to stay and that CD sales will not be their major source of revenue in the future.