[Bob in St. Louis]

ZLS - Since you mentioned libraries, I have a question:
The RIAA says on their site that it's illegal for me to loan my CD to somebody.  OK, whatever...
But.......The library can loan my their copy.  And it's legal? 
What's the double standard all about? 

Bob

[giantsteps]

 I give up...come and get me!
 Frank

[Wayner]

Time to simplify. If it is not yours, it is someone elsese. STOP STEALING OTHER PEOPLELES MUSIC. If you pay for it, that is good. If you steel it, that is bad. The law is simply written.

If you don't get it,..............................

[rajacat]

I think that the law is unenforceable on any scale that would deter most individuals. Clearly the music labels must develop another way to sell music. They need to accept the fact that most people consider copying CD's to be just a minor moral lapse and not much to worry about. You can't expect everybody to be saints. Really.... are most of the people with iPods hardened criminals? Most of those mp3 files have been pirated and/or copied. The labels should lower the price of CDs drastically so that it isn't worth the hassle to copy.

-Roy

[ZLS]

ZLS - Since you mentioned libraries, I have a question:
The RIAA says on their site that it's illegal for me to loan my CD to somebody.  OK, whatever...
But.......The library can loan my their copy.  And it's legal? 
What's the double standard all about? 

Bob

    Bob the answer to your question is the age old conflict of theory vs. reality.  The theory says no it is not legal; the determining factor is not the intention (however noble) but the act itself.  The reality is there is no way that the RIAA wants to come out against public libraries providing this service.  It would be a PR nightmare!  I am sure that the RIAA considered that if they were to do so, an individual artist (For some reason I feel that Country Artists would lead the way) could generate immense favorable publicity by donating there CD's to their local library and openly defying the RIAA! 
    Rajacat is correct; the RIAA has brought these problems upon themselves due to their business practices. 
    There is in law an expression, " There is no Right without a Remedy"  However illegal the act of copying CD's is the practice is so widespread as to make enforcement of the law impossible.  This forces the RIAA to pick and choose what and when they choose to challenge and individual act.  This leads back to Bob's original question.

[opnly bafld]

I am sure that the RIAA considered that if they were to do so, an individual artist (For some reason I feel that Country Artists would lead the way) could generate immense favorable publicity by donating their CD's to their local library and openly defying the RIAA! 

With the exception of Garth Brooks of course. 

Lin

[samplesj]

Time to simplify. If it is not yours, it is someone elsese. STOP STEALING OTHER PEOPLELES MUSIC. If you pay for it, that is good. If you steel it, that is bad. The law is simply written.

If you don't get it,..............................

Oh, the irony

If you don't get it,..............................  Indeed!

Please go back and read the very first post.  They are fighting to make copying a CD you OWN to your computer for ONLY your own use illegal.  There is NO theft there at all.  The music company has gotten their money.  They are saying that you can't convert it into another format.  This is the same as saying that you can't make a tape copy of the cd, or can't make a tape and/or computer copy of vinyl.

If they manage to twist the laws into support this then how soon before you aren't able to record broadcast television because the studios are losing out on a potential customer for compliation disks.  For that matter how can RIAA think they'll get ANY traction with making copies illegal since for video its already been acknowledged legal?  How is audio any different than video?

Anyway before you go off on a holier than thou spout you might want to actually read the posts.

[Scott F.]

Please go back and read the very first post.  They are fighting to make copying a CD you OWN to your computer for ONLY your own use illegal. 

samples,

Here is a link to a post I made a couple of pages back. Follow the link in it to the NPR streaming interview with the RIAA and the Washington Post. It should prove to be pretty informative.
NPR

When it comes to Libraries and copying music, this is pure speculation but I wonder if that is a loophole in the law. I think Congress views libraries as a place of research thus it becomes exempt from copyright issues. When you read through the copyright laws that ctviggen provided from Cornell Law , though I couldn't find specific legislation covering loans from libraries, there are plenty of inferences leading one to believe libraries are exempt because they are for research rather than entertainment or commercial use.

Again, that is pure speculation as I'm not a lawyer. On a personal basis, I think copying music obtained from a library would be the same as stealing, loophole or not. You are essentially taking revenues from the artist (screw the RIAA). This, of course, is all mute if the music has become "public domain" (all copyrights have expired).

[Bob in St. Louis]

Good point Scott, but "we" (as opposed to the teenagers burning the latest "Britney" tune), are audiophiles. "We" are burning for research purposes. "We" are finding that ever elusive 'perfect' song that synergizes with our system. It just may take quite a few stolen, ripped, burnt, transferred discs to find the right one. 

Sorry man, just playing devils advocate.

Bob

[nathanm]

I'd love to see an investigation into the families of RIAA executives and\or lawyers and their own real world music practices.  I wonder if those involved bring down the hammer on their kids for copying music after a hard day at the office suing people and poring over legal briefs.  I'd love to see how much hypocrisy there is, that is, IF there is any.  *cough*  No of course, I'm certain those who want US to adhere to such draconian laws are themselves pillars of virtue.  I am sure they buy a new copy anytime their original CD gets a scuff.

Who knows, maybe it could work out as a solution for the dynamic range problem.  If these people want us to buy a new formal copy of every album we want for the house, the car, the computer etc. maybe they could give us that Hi-Fi vs. Automobile mix I've been dreaming of?  Hmmm...

Don't worry though, eventually we will all be in jail and music will be entirely provided by the warden.  (Jailhouse rock?)  Nothing to worry about!  Just don't go broadcasting any damn opera over the PA or you'll get another month in isolation for FCC violations.

[bpape]

I'd love to see an investigation into the families of RIAA executives and\or lawyers and their own real world music practices.  I wonder if those involved bring down the hammer on their kids for copying music after a hard day at the office suing people and poring over legal briefs.  I'd love to see how much hypocrisy there is, that is, IF there is any.  *cough*  No of course, I'm certain those who want US to adhere to such draconian laws are themselves pillars of virtue.  I am sure they buy a new copy anytime their original CD gets a scuff.

Now THAT's funny.     I'd love to see how many people in that industry have or have kids that have ipods, server based systems, etc. 

Bryan

[jcpix]

No of course, I'm certain those who want US to adhere to such draconian laws are themselves pillars of virtue.  I am sure they buy a new copy anytime their original CD gets a scuff.

They don't ever buy new copies, they get freebies.  I work for a media company and we get at least 50 free review cd's every week.  What do you think happens to those?   

[AB]

Another article, this time an OpEd piece...

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jan/07/fair-use-abuse/

[nathanm]

I won't argue that stealing music isn't wrong, it definitely is.  But there also isn't an easy metric to measure the POSITIVE influence that illegal copying has on the music business as a whole.  I would say that IF it were possible for the lawyers to have their way; to have a completely locked down system where copying was 100% impossible that the industry would shrink dramatically, people would not know about the music they currently know about and that music overall would not be as popular as it is.  Years ago I did tons of tape trading through the mail.  Illegal?  Probably.  But it also turned me onto tons of bands I would never have otherwise known about and caused me to spend tons of money on perfectly legal albums through the normal channels.  If a buzz develops about a certain band it should be acknowledged that at least SOME part of the popularity just MIGHT be thanks to illegal copies.  The RIAA would be foolish to not acknowledge this reality, if not publically, at least to themselves.  If they were smart they'd realize they cannot possibly stop this and that they had better start offering a more desirable product.  Music copying is a crime of sheer convenience; your grandmother has probably done it.  But hell, why go through the work of promoting and selling music in a rapidly changing culture when you can prey upon some careless sucker and milk him for his life savings?  So much easier to have the school bully shake down kids for their lunch money than have to do real work.  Then of course by acting as litigious scum they generate a self-perpetuating circle where otherwise normal customers start getting cheesed off and start pirating music just out of righteous indignation.  The RIAA made this bed, now they're lying in it.

[TomS]

Good point.  I've bought a ton of CD's after hearing an isolated track by someone on a likely illegally copied sampler or mix CD.  Same as hearing it on a streamer or radio station.