Blink-182, my favorite band, recently released its new album. And as tempting as it was to run BitTorrent to download it, I decided that the band deserved and earned my $15.

With new technological advances, it’s beyond easy to download an entire album or that movie that has yet to come out on DVD from the comfort of your own dorm room. And many of us do so without thinking of the possible repercussions; it has been so ingrained in our lives that buying music or movies has become a foreign concept for us. The use of file-sharing, however, is nothing new to UCLA administration, with 531 citations handed out last year. I am not innocent in this practice, which leads me to ponder why we feel justified in partaking in illegal downloads.

The most convenient answer is the economic excuse. We are so conditioned to complain about the outrageous prices of CDs and DVDs and the $1-or-more songs found on iTunes, that we never think past that argument. We view the artists as the enemies, furious that they charge ludicrous prices for us to enjoy their work. But the truth is we, the general public, are the enemy, and those artists are the victims of glorified robbery.

Viewing the issue through an economic lens may satisfy our conscience for the moment, but am I to believe illegal file-sharing strikes no moral chord? Those who illegally share files are quick to forget that musicians and actors create music and movies because it is not just their hobby but more so their job; and when we illegally download, they are not compensated for the amount of work they have done.

Those who continue to illegally share files feel justified; however, the issue is no different than going to a restaurant and walking out without paying. The restaurant employees devote their hard work and effort but will get nothing in return, just as the artist will not. As it is, a majority of the artists do not see the millions of dollars the general public believes they do; the record company takes the bulk of the share, and those artists are left with whatever remains. When the amount isn’t so large to start off with, an artist is left doing his job for a nominal fee.

It’s astounding that people would vehemently oppose stealing from a store yet they turn a blind eye to illegal sharing.

People feel at ease with stealing music and movies because they are not able to witness the dedication that is put forth. We can see waiters laboring at a restaurant and employees performing their due diligence at a department store, but we rarely see a musician at work. And without the threat of imminent consequences, it is this inability to recognize the effort that goes into the creation of music and movies that allows the public to continue to guiltlessly pirate.

More than just robbery, piracy is a threat to intellectual property. These tracks and movies are the brainchildren of musicians, actors and directors. Through illegal downloads, we steal their works without ever acknowledging their creative genius. We would never consider stealing Vincent Van Gogh’s “Starry Night,” yet we continue to steal work from modern-day artists.

But I am well aware that morality will not stop the majority from downloading. Illegal downloading and file-sharing will continue, so it is up to the record companies to implement a viable option that will accommodate both artists and the public.

In late 2008 the Recording Industry Association of America stated it would stop filing lawsuits against those it found in violation of copyright infringement but would rely on the assistance of Internet providers to prevent these intellectual thefts. Major Internet service providers would send emails threatening to cut off Internet access to those who continued to take part in illegal uploading.

Stopping the means of accessing illegal files is essential and is even more imperative now that the death of the CD is slowly approaching; the 2009 CD figure showed $6.3 billion in revenue, starkly contrasted to the $14.6 billion of revenue in 1999. Along with partnering with Internet providers, record companies should use incentives and user-friendly applications to regain this lost revenue; licensing music videos on YouTube and radio stations such as Pandora, which are visited by hundreds of thousands of visitors a day, is a brilliant business move.

The morals of the issue should be enough to convince us to abandon our need to download free material, but alas, that will not serve as the solution. Record companies must find unique ways to profit, and artists need to be compensated for their work. We all, myself included, should take a deep look into the depths of our soul, and maybe then we can fully comprehend that our intellectual theft only destroys the creative ingenuity society produces.