[ZLS]

    Did the RIAA learn nothing from the Sony debacle?  
    How did the SACD that could not be ripped onto a HD work out?
    Instead of fighting against a technology that already exists they should be embracing it.  Eliminating the physical disc; allowing downloads onto a computer that could not be copied is much more of a feasible solution.  Artist's are realizing that they no longer need the big companies for development and distribution.  Welcome to YouTube!  The law (if it indded exists) is unenforceable.  The last time this country tried to enforce and unenforceable law the result was prohibition.  While it is fun to imagine all the Audio Societies being forced underground (Can,t you just see a slot opening on a door and the audiophile saying "Fletcher Munson sent me) the backlash would be devastating to the RIAA.  

[Daygloworange]

Years ago, with the anatomy of the "record deal" being what it was, their arguments would hold water. But those anatomies are antiquated.

A lot of artists nowadays fund their own albums out of pocket, and get hooked up with a major record label for distribution only.

A lot of record companies won't spend a dime on advertising and promotion.

The record companies are businesses with legitimate overhead and costs, but....they are also a bunch of greedy, exploiting wolves.

Cheers

[AB]

More of the same for anyone interested...

http://blogs.computerworld.com/the_riaa_hates_us_all_and_bigtit_hu

This seems to be getting some attention.

This one too...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/31/riaa_cds_copies_computer/

[Bob in St. Louis]

How about a quote from the horses mouth:

Quote from the RIAA
" Copying CDs:

*It’s okay to copy music onto an analog cassette, but not for commercial purposes.

*It’s also okay to copy music onto special Audio CD-R’s, mini-discs, and digital tapes (because royalties have been paid on them) – but, again, not for commercial purposes.

**Beyond that, there’s no legal "right" to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:

-The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own

-The copy is just for your personal use. It’s not a personal use – in fact, it’s illegal – to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying."

A mear snipet from the RIAA site:
http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php?content_selector=piracy_online_the_law

Bob

[EDS_]

How about a quote from the horses mouth:

Quote from the RIAA
" Copying CDs:

*It’s okay to copy music onto an analog cassette, but not for commercial purposes.

*It’s also okay to copy music onto special Audio CD-R’s, mini-discs, and digital tapes (because royalties have been paid on them) – but, again, not for commercial purposes.

**Beyond that, there’s no legal "right" to copy the copyrighted music on a CD onto a CD-R. However, burning a copy of CD onto a CD-R, or transferring a copy onto your computer hard drive or your portable music player, won’t usually raise concerns so long as:

-The copy is made from an authorized original CD that you legitimately own

-The copy is just for your personal use. It’s not a personal use – in fact, it’s illegal – to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying."

A mear snipet from the RIAA site:
http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php?content_selector=piracy_online_the_law

Bob

Thanks for that.

[Philistine]

OK here's a theoretical situation:
You own the LP/Cassette/CD/8 Track/MD (any combination or permutation of these), then borrow the CD to copy to your hard drive - still keeping the original format in your possession and returning the CD.  Legal or 'illegal'?

 

[Bemopti123]

OK here's a theoretical situation:
You own the LP/Cassette/CD/8 Track/MD (any combination or permutation of these), then borrow the CD to copy to your hard drive - still keeping the original format in your possession and returning the CD.  Legal or 'illegal'?

 

I will have to say it is illegal, although you have a bought copy but remember you have the rights paid to that original format and not the later, digital one.  It would be legal if you use a software to convert it to digital and then, load it to your HD.  I know it is somewhat dumb, but their rules are not supposed to cover all bases, right?

[Bob in St. Louis]

Legal or 'illegal'?

Interesting "what if", but by the letter of their law, I'll repeat a line I quoted from RIAA:

" it’s illegal – to give away the copy or lend it to others for copying."
They're probably not interested in 'what ifs', or 'buts'.

(But I'd sleep just fine at night having copied a CD given your senario).

Bob

[jkelly]

Scott F. - looks like you had the story right from the beginning! Nice work.

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9839897-7.html?tag=nefd.pulse

Jeff

[Scott F.]

Hiya Jeff,

Heres the link to the debate Sherman (RIAA) and Fisher (Post) had on NPR. It just so happened I had just climbed into my car on the way to a meeting for work and these two were going at it.

Personally I thought Sherman was more than a little wormy in a few of his answers. I wish they would give us a definitive answer about ripping legally purchased CD's to our hard drives (in non-shared folders) for personal use. When asked the question directly, he said he can't comment directly since there are hundreds of scenarios where it may or may not be OK to do it. In stead he referred back to the RIAA website verbiage where they say "..it usually won't raise concerns..". My problem is the word usually. That means that the matter may still be open for interpretation.

One positive that might come from all this who-ha is that the law makers may finally take a definitive stance on the existing law and amend it. though that likely won't happen as they are all swept up in the election year nonsense going on right now.



This debate sent my feeble mind wandering and it brought another issue up that I don't think anyone has thought about before. As I see it (at least at first glance), buying or selling used CD's is likely illegal. When you think about the right involved with copyrighted music, they are secured only when you purchase a brand new CD. When you sell that used CD, you relinquish all rights to that music. In turn (obviously) the purchaser has no legal right to own that disc or listen to its contents. Conceivably, you could be prosecuted for selling your old CD's or vinyl as that could be considered illegal sharing since you aren't sending the RIAA or the artist their royalties (thus transferring the copyright ownership). This means all the used music we buy on eBay (or wherever) is illegal.
....the worm turns again. As I think about this, I probably shouldn't have typed it. If the RIAA reads this, I may have just given them another means to go after us. Then again, I could be completely wrong as I'm not a lawyer.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Well said Scott.
I've wondered about that used thing as well. When you buy a new CD you've essentially "signed a contract" with RIAA, the artist, and the recording company stating you will follow all of their rules. When it's bought second hand (or given away for that matter) the second owner has not "signed" that contract and isn't bound by any of those rules.
I recall several years ago hearing a radio interview with Garth Brooks regarding the existence of used 'record stores'. He was outraged that it's legal to sell your recorded media to a store (that will make a profit from HIS art/music) with the intention of somebody else purchasing it. I know Mr. Brooks is a little tight on cash right now and needs the royalties, but I personally don't see how he thinks a fellow doesn't have the God given right to sell something when you've grown tired of it. I suppose he thinks we should simply toss the CD in the trash when we don't want it anymore. Or maybe we should be required to turn it back into the record company for a small discount on the newest release of another artist. Like a glass Coke bottle 30 years ago.
I fear the day will come when each and every CD or DVD will have it's own serial number, like a Microsoft authentication key number. That way they could track the use and ..........  Oh Hell.....I just gave them another idea. 

What's the convoy of black Chevy Suburbans with dark tinted windows doing in front of my house?
OH NO....it's the RIAA cops!

Bob

[ZLS]

The circumstances I would choose to challenge the RIAA position would be as follows.  I would buy a CD (either new or used) listen to it then rip it into my Hard Drive, and then donate it to my local library.  I would seek a statement from the RIAA that this practice was acceptable.  This would force the RIAA to either agree, deny or not issue a definitive ruling.  The latter two ruling would allow me to go to court to
challenge the RIAA forcing it to come out against someone donating to their public library for the use of people who are not fortunate enough to be able to purchase the CD.  The best part is the library can make the argument that having these donated CD's available would allow law abiding people access to them rather than be forced to obtain illegally burned copies!  Let us see a local politician come out against this pratice and take the hard RIAA line!  Can't you just see the headlines, " Local politician against public libraries! He/She says no to charitable giving!" 
    The goal in challenging a unfair rule or law is to carefully pick the best set of facts to force the other side to be in  the position of defending the indefensible.

[ctviggen]

This debate sent my feeble mind wandering and it brought another issue up that I don't think anyone has thought about before. As I see it (at least at first glance), buying or selling used CD's is likely illegal. When you think about the right involved with copyrighted music, they are secured only when you purchase a brand new CD. When you sell that used CD, you relinquish all rights to that music. In turn (obviously) the purchaser has no legal right to own that disc or listen to its contents. Conceivably, you could be prosecuted for selling your old CD's or vinyl as that could be considered illegal sharing since you aren't sending the RIAA or the artist their royalties (thus transferring the copyright ownership). This means all the used music we buy on eBay (or wherever) is illegal.
....the worm turns again. As I think about this, I probably shouldn't have typed it. If the RIAA reads this, I may have just given them another means to go after us. Then again, I could be completely wrong as I'm not a lawyer.

No, used music is perfectly fine to sell (ie, you buy the CD, decide you don't like it, and then sell it).  This is called the first sale doctrine.  See, eg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

See also:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/109.html

[ctviggen]

The circumstances I would choose to challenge the RIAA position would be as follows.  I would buy a CD (either new or used) listen to it then rip it into my Hard Drive, and then donate it to my local library.  I would seek a statement from the RIAA that this practice was acceptable.  This would force the RIAA to either agree, deny or not issue a definitive ruling.  The latter two ruling would allow me to go to court to
challenge the RIAA forcing it to come out against someone donating to their public library for the use of people who are not fortunate enough to be able to purchase the CD.  The best part is the library can make the argument that having these donated CD's available would allow law abiding people access to them rather than be forced to obtain illegally burned copies!  Let us see a local politician come out against this pratice and take the hard RIAA line!  Can't you just see the headlines, " Local politician against public libraries! He/She says no to charitable giving!" 
    The goal in challenging a unfair rule or law is to carefully pick the best set of facts to force the other side to be in  the position of defending the indefensible.

This is perfectly defensible, as it's illegal.  You made a copy, then sell the original.  That's a clear violation of copyright law, regardless of whom you give it to. 

[TomS]

The circumstances I would choose to challenge the RIAA position would be as follows.  I would buy a CD (either new or used) listen to it then rip it into my Hard Drive, and then donate it to my local library.  I would seek a statement from the RIAA that this practice was acceptable.  This would force the RIAA to either agree, deny or not issue a definitive ruling.  The latter two ruling would allow me to go to court to
challenge the RIAA forcing it to come out against someone donating to their public library for the use of people who are not fortunate enough to be able to purchase the CD.  The best part is the library can make the argument that having these donated CD's available would allow law abiding people access to them rather than be forced to obtain illegally burned copies!  Let us see a local politician come out against this pratice and take the hard RIAA line!  Can't you just see the headlines, " Local politician against public libraries! He/She says no to charitable giving!" 
    The goal in challenging a unfair rule or law is to carefully pick the best set of facts to force the other side to be in  the position of defending the indefensible.

This is perfectly defensible, as it's illegal.  You made a copy, then sell the original.  That's a clear violation of copyright law, regardless of whom you give it to. 

Yes, and then what do you think the people checking them out from the library are doing?  Listening for a week and giving it back?  Uh, right.  Probably copying them illegally to iTunes, iPod, and/or other music player too. 

Such a slippery slope.  I'm content to buy the CD, rip to my Slim library, back it up to the second drive, then pack the CD safely away for archiving.  In my mind everybody should be happy.  I paid for it once (distribution company and hopefully the artist) and am using it exclusively for myself in the media format that's most appropriate for where I am.  Same as ripping my LP's to my library, which I also paid for and still keep the vinyl stored away.  As soon as I donate it, sell it, give it or loan to a friend (who copies it), or otherwise dispose of it such that I can't produce a legitimately distributed original of what's on my drive, all bets are off.  That's just asking for trouble.

I'd rather do this than find us in a DRM situation where we have to pay each time to play somehow or have expiration bombs that turn it off at some point such as the subscription services.  Many application software copy protection schemes work(ed) that way and/or with hardware dongles and such.  Let's hope it doesn't come to that just because we're finally in a mostly digital and connected age and it can be done.

I know it's much more complex than this but my small brain isn't quite up to the task of comprehending all of it.  I just have to be able to sleep at night, based on trying to handle it with some sense of integrity.  We call it passing the "red face test" around these parts 

[Scott F.]

No, used music is perfectly fine to sell (ie, you buy the CD, decide you don't like it, and then sell it).  This is called the first sale doctrine.  See, eg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

See also:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/109.html

Great info. Thanks for the links 

[bpape]

The circumstances I would choose to challenge the RIAA position would be as follows.  I would buy a CD (either new or used) listen to it then rip it into my Hard Drive, and then donate it to my local library.  I would seek a statement from the RIAA that this practice was acceptable.  This would force the RIAA to either agree, deny or not issue a definitive ruling.  The latter two ruling would allow me to go to court to
challenge the RIAA forcing it to come out against someone donating to their public library for the use of people who are not fortunate enough to be able to purchase the CD.  The best part is the library can make the argument that having these donated CD's available would allow law abiding people access to them rather than be forced to obtain illegally burned copies!  Let us see a local politician come out against this pratice and take the hard RIAA line!  Can't you just see the headlines, " Local politician against public libraries! He/She says no to charitable giving!" 
    The goal in challenging a unfair rule or law is to carefully pick the best set of facts to force the other side to be in  the position of defending the indefensible.

This is perfectly defensible, as it's illegal.  You made a copy, then sell the original.  That's a clear violation of copyright law, regardless of whom you give it to. 

Yes, and then what do you think the people checking them out from the library are doing?  Listening for a week and giving it back?  Uh, right.  Probably copying them illegally to iTunes, iPod, and/or other music player too. 

Such a slippery slope.  I'm content to buy the CD, rip to my Slim library, back it up to the second drive, then pack the CD safely away for archiving.  In my mind everybody should be happy.  I paid for it once (distribution company and hopefully the artist) and am using it exclusively for myself in the media format that's most appropriate for where I am.  Same as ripping my LP's to my library, which I also paid for and still keep the vinyl stored away.  As soon as I donate it, sell it, give it or loan to a friend (who copies it), or otherwise dispose of it such that I can't produce a legitimately distributed original of what's on my drive, all bets are off.  That's just asking for trouble.

I'd rather do this than find us in a DRM situation where we have to pay each time to play somehow or have expiration bombs that turn it off at some point such as the subscription services.  Many application software copy protection schemes work(ed) that way and/or with hardware dongles and such.  Let's hope it doesn't come to that just because we're finally in a mostly digital and connected age and it can be done.

I know it's much more complex than this but my small brain isn't quite up to the task of comprehending all of it.  I just have to be able to sleep at night, based on trying to handle it with some sense of integrity.  We call it passing the "red face test" around these parts 

It really doesn't NEED to be any harder than that. 

Bryan

[rajacat]

The consumer never shared in the lower cost of production per unit that CD production enabled. The big media companies just continued to maximize profits and the CD buyer has to cough up $15 for a piece of media that is cheap to make, distribute and unfortunately copy. If the big producers were not so greedy and offered albums for a more reasonable $5.00, I suspect much of the unauthorized copying would cease. Of course, they might have to give up some of their stock options and private jets . Here and there I can find new vinyl for ~$17.00 which is much more expensive to produce and transport.

[nathanm]

Boy, I wish I had the RIAA's "problem": my legal business venture would be so profitable thanks to my legal paying customers that I'd have enough money left over for legal shenanigans in the courts!  A pretty sweet problem to have I'd say.

[Daygloworange]

Boy, I wish I had the RIAA's "problem": my legal business venture would be so profitable thanks to my legal paying customers that I'd have enough money left over for legal shenanigans in the courts!  A pretty sweet problem to have I'd say.

An ironic anecdote. 

Cheers