In today's technologically advanced society, it is easier than ever to beat the system and illegally download music for free, rather than pay money for the same thing. Most people who participate in illegally downloading music believe that in the long run, it does not hurt the artist's success if some people do not pay for their music. However, if Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative is applied to the situation, then illegally downloading music would directly impact the artist's success.
The categorical imperative states that in order to judge if something is ethical or not it should be applied to a large scale. That is, if everyone were to do it, would the action still be ethical? In the situation of illegally downloading music, if everyone were to do it, then it would become unethical because no one involved in the process of making and producing music would be making money. If no one in the industry is making money from their work, then the industry is going to die out, which in turn, would result in no music.
If the same situation is viewed using John Stewart Mills' principle of utility, the ethics remain about the same. The principle of utility states that a situation is ethical if it provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In the situation of illegally downloading music, the population of people downloading music is benefited by the luxury of free music. However, the people involved in making and producing the music, are not benefited because their work is being used without any compensation. If the work is not paid for, then no profit is being made. If no profit is being made, then there is no point for music to be produced. If music is not produced, then there is no music to download, which would leave those illegally downloading music without any source of entertainment. So in the long run, no one is benefited by illegally downloading music because if enough profit is lost, then no one will produce music to be downloaded.
