Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RIAA: Ripping CDs to iPod not 'Fair Use'

samzenpus posted more than 8 years ago | from the buy-another-copy dept.

The Courts 830

dotpavan writes "EFF has this article about RIAA saying that ripping CDs and backing them up does not come under Fair use. Ars Technica also reports on this, by quoting, "The [submitted arguments in favor of granting exemptions to the DMCA] provide no arguments or legal authority that making back up copies of CDs is a noninfringing use. In addition, the submissions provide no evidence that access controls are currently preventing them from making back up copies of CDs or that they are likely to do so in the future. Myriad online downloading services are available and offer varying types of digital rights management alternatives. For example, the Apple FairPlay technology allows users to make a limited number of copies for personal use. Presumably, consumers concerned with the ability to make back up copies would choose to purchase music from a service that allowed such copying. Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices. Similar to the motion picture industry, the recording industry has faced, in online piracy, a direct attack on its ability to enjoy its copyrights.""

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Big surprise (4, Interesting)

nagora (177841) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731613)

An organisation whose entire business model is now to resell the same product over and over again is hardly going to say that buying it once is enough. But in a world of "one dollar, one vote", who's going to stop them?

Re:Big surprise (2, Insightful)

Agent00Wang (146185) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731637)

It seems to me that the arguement in the article is just further incentive to not buy CDs. Even if you have a DRM protected file that you've downloaded, you can still play it on your portable device, in your car (through an audio input), or just about anywhere else. With a CD, you are essentially limited to only playing it in a CD player. For the majority of consumers (particularly the biggest target market, Gen-Y), not a very good deal.

Re:Big surprise (4, Insightful)

nagora (177841) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731701)

It seems to me that the arguement in the article is just further incentive to not buy CDs.

Which is exactly what the RIAA wants; they make far more off a download than a CD, at least on a per-track basis. Ringtones even more so. And for a lower quality product.

TWW

Re:Big surprise (1)

Freexe (717562) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731717)

I download all my music from emusic, so i guess the RIAA lost my income. To bad for them

Big Money (1, Insightful)

millahtime (710421) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731658)

And, in a world where the top few decision makes get most of the money and it's a lot of money they will keep pushing it and trying to beat down the voice of the majority.

Buy it again, Sam. (5, Insightful)

IIDX (873577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731614)

"Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices."

Thanks, so I'll just buy another copy. Great solution.

Re:Buy it again, Sam. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731680)

Just print your own money to pay for them with. If anyone complains point out that "replacements are readily available (from banks) at affordable prices".

Re:Buy it again, Sam. (5, Insightful)

Maximum Prophet (716608) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731752)

Um, I have several CD that are no longer available, except perhaps, used, at higher prices than I paid for them. Changes One and Two by Bowie come to mind.

Re:Buy it again, Sam. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731784)

If the RIAA had their way, you wouldn't [legally] be able to buy a used cd even if you wanted to. Personally, I don't buy CDs because they fuck up my Grado stylus.

Re:Buy it again, Sam. (3, Insightful)

Rev Wally (814101) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731778)

What about those CDs that go out of print?

About 10% of the CDs that I own, I would never be able to find again.

Re:Buy it again, Sam. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731795)

thats bullcrap, you stupid fag.

stop trying to sound like some elitist faggot.

No CDs (5, Interesting)

Agent00Wang (146185) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731615)

So are they arguing that you have to buy music from an online dealer (something akin to iTunes) if you want to be able to use your portable device? Sounds like just one more reason not to buy CDs.

Re:No CDs (1)

camliner (685937) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731651)

You beat me too it... This is exactly how I take the statement! If I can't carry content around the way I want to with one format, I'm going to buy the format that does allow it.

Quality, however... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731756)

iTunes doesn't rip their catalog nearly as well as I do. Higher bitrates, and in fact, the signal as burnt to the disk, are only available on CD's. If you are playing on higher end equipment (something like some Shure in-ear headphones) or your home stereo, an actual CD will yield a lot better source material. And when using my home system, I'd rather play the disk than the ripped versions. Of course, some can't tell the difference, but some can. I think iTunes rips are ok, but they aren't great... and the fact that backups are *limited* and I have to use their service to "authorize/deauthorize" does not help at all. I don't think the RIAA realizes most of their customers are honest people who are not "stealing", but rather just want to avoid lugging a lot of CD's around. They don't get their customer base at all.

No, just the opposite (1)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731697)

"Sounds like just one more reason not to buy CDs."

The fact that they don't want you to make a backup or copy it to your ipod doesn't mean it's illegal. I mean, I think it's wrong if everybody doesn't send me $20, but that's just my opinion.

No, CD's are still the best deal because you can purchase them for under $10, you can back them up, you can put them on any of your own portable music players without restriction, you get liner notes, and you get the best possible quality sound (that is available to the public).

What's not to like? The fact that you have to take 5 minutes to rip it to an mp3?

Re:No, just the opposite (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731775)

Uhm... they're not saying they don't like it, they're saying it's illegal. Slight difference.

Re:No CDs (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731706)

Also, by purchasing online, you can also as part of some DRM schemes burn a copy of the song you purchased to CD.

I never thought I would say this, but DRM is the winner here - might as well close all record stores.

*shudder*

Re:No CDs (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731785)

???? What?

That is a really silly stance on that. Just because a company or group says that something is not the way they like it does not make it a law nor should anyone change how they live or do things just because someone said something.

Why do you have a roll-over and play dead attitude towards this? Personally I'm going to protest by buying a bunch of used CD's and publically ripping them today in starbucks with a sign taped to my laptop lid saying "I'm violating Copyrights right now!"

Everyone here should be informing the general sheep we live and work with that their mp3 players are going to be considered illegal copyright infringement devices and that ripping the CD's they own for use in their mp3 player is considered a Heinous crime by the record companies.

  Ripping music for your own use is helping the terrorists!!!

They can bite my (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731616)

Shiney mp3 encoded ass

Now, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731618)

Who would say RIAA though ripping CDs is not fair use?

Wow. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731619)

Step 1: Make Back ups illegal.
Step 2: ??? (Oh yeah, make low quality media so the public is required to buy your crap every three years)
Step 3: Profit!

What about... (5, Insightful)

orderthruchaos (770967) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731622)

a boycott? Seriously... it seems the only way to get the attention of hostile businesses is to deny them income.

Re:What about... (1)

phlegmofdiscontent (459470) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731652)

Way ahead of you, dude. I haven't bought a CD in years....

Me too! (1)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731754)

This revolution is really taking off...

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731723)

I've been boycotting them since 1995.. Am I the only one doing this? //T

Re:What about... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731762)

Oh great. So a small subset of one of the planets most irrelevant minorities (read: slashdot nerds) are going to stop buying something that most of them don't buy anyway? The music industry is shaking in its boots, I'm sure.

preposterous! (1)

burne (686114) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731625)

I'm not allowed to listen to my own music on my own musicplayer?

Isn't there some kind of hunting-permit for out-of-control corporate idiots? Somebody should stop this madness!

Re:preposterous! (1)

mpathetiq (726625) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731702)

Just sick Cheney on 'em. 5mm birdshot all up in the RIAA face!

Backup and preservation of investment? (4, Interesting)

richardoz (529837) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731626)

When I was a kid my, my friend's dad has an audiophile turntable, cassette deck and reel-to-reel setup. When I would purchase and album, I would take it over to his house and copy it to cassette and sometimes reel-to-reel. I would never play the album again unless I lost or damaged the cassette. What options would I have today if the RIAA has their way?

Re:Backup and preservation of investment? (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731682)

To take it up the ass, more or less

And enjoy it, too.

Re:Backup and preservation of investment? (1)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731793)

You could take a picture of the CD. Good luck playing that though... maybe if you cut it out and blew it up a few times with the copier to cd size..... Or would that be violating the DMCA?

Very affordable (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731628)

" Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices."

No duh. When my "The Wall" CD was wrecked, I found the music on Kazaa Lite, and it as at an extremely affordable price I could not refuse.

Let me get this straight: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731632)

" Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices."

I thought I was "licensing the content," not "buying the CD." Shouldn't I be able to put my licensed content wherever I want?

Until the companies offer free download replacement of the music I am (ahem) licensing, why should I care what they consider "affordable"?

Enjoy? (3, Insightful)

ShadowsHawk (916454) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731636)

" Similar to the motion picture industry, the recording industry has faced, in online piracy, a direct attack on its ability to enjoy its copyrights."

Since when did enjoy == screw the customer for every last dime?

Re:Enjoy? (4, Funny)

ettlz (639203) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731693)

Since when did enjoy == screw the customer for every last dime?
Silly! Screwing is an inherently enjoyable activity!

Re:Enjoy? (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731696)

Don't you enjoy screwing your girl? (assuming you have one)

Enjoyment = screwage, the more screwage the more enjoyment !

Re:Enjoy? (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731725)

You've never been in a casino before have you?

I think this has been said before... (2, Interesting)

iogan (943605) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731640)

... but this is simply going too far!

And to all the people who laugh when you tell them that the record companies would rather have you pay twice or more for music that you already bought, well here's proof. They really, honestly, do believe that what you bought is not yours. It's still theirs to do with as they please.

Starting tomorrow, I'm going to start bringing my CD's back, even old ones. Nothing of this was mentioned when I bought them, and I don't think this is fair. Hence I want my money back. I urge everyone to do the same.

Re:I think this has been said before... (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731779)

Is there a warranty period for CDs?

Can you get replacements for them within a certain timespan?

With game companies, they usually offer some form of replacement procedure whereby returning the original cd and some fraction of the price you get a replacement.
We had to do this with my missuses copy of Sims (cd was sat on by my eldest)
I think it cost us about £10 but we got a shiney new cd.

Seems quite reasonable to me (thought I would still prefer to be able to make my own backup copy)

From the Sims site:


  First, check to see if there are any scratches, fingerprints, or marks of any kind on the disk surface. Something even as small as a piece of hair or a very light scratch can cause this error. If you find any fingerprints or debris try cleaning the CD with a soft cotton cloth. If after cleaning the CD the error still occurs, or if there are still scratches you can send the CD in to be replaced. You can contact our warranty department at (650) 628-1900 to exchange your disk for a new one. To replace your software you will need a sales receipt dated within the 90-day warranty period. Electronic Arts warrants its software to the original purchaser that Electronic Arts' software is free from defects for a period of 90-days as stated in the manual. If the disk has been misused, or the 90-day warranty has passed, then a fee will be assessed to replace the software.

FEES:

Floppy Disk and PC-CD products: $7.50 per CD
GameCube, G.B.Advanced, G.B. Color,
PlayStation, Playstation 2, & Xbox products: $15.00
Nintendo 64 cartridges: $30.00
All manuals: $5.00
Reference Cards: $3.00

I hope this comes to court (5, Interesting)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731641)

With that particular declaration under oath in the Grokster case in mind, I hope this comes to court.
The only question that remains then is "which of the two statements is perjury?".

Well duh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731643)

So if it's illegal to use them the way i want, i guess i'm not buying CDs anymore.

buffering... (4, Interesting)

muftak (636261) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731645)

Ripping a CD that you own to an mp3 player, is just like your CD player reading the cd ahead into a buffer. Are the RIAA saying that CD players with buffers are illegal?

Re:buffering... (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731712)

You HAD to bring that one up eh? You just HAD to give them new ideas ! Congratulation, thanks to you CD players will be deemed illegal starting tomorrow !

Re:buffering... (1)

skingers6894 (816110) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731713)

Great! Now you've started it....

Now we are going to have to pay extra for the "licensed for skip-free technology" versions!

Re:buffering... (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731720)

Yes, of course.

But RIAA can give you a license to play music during one hour a day on one CD player. And at a very affordable price!

Re:buffering... (1)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731747)

The song in the buffer cant be played independently of the CD. The CD has to be in the player for the buffer to be used to play the music that is on it. Now, I know, you could design a buffer that did not work this way, but let's assume that they're designed this way on purpose. if they are designed intentionally not to work if a CD is not in the player, then by designing or modifying your CD player such that you could play the song without the CD by way of the buffer, then you have violated the DMCA, and the RIAA is going to ram a lawsuit up your ass.

Re:buffering... (1)

spot35 (644375) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731787)

But that'd be just stupid!

These people really don't get it do they? (1, Interesting)

RichMeatyTaste (519596) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731648)

Downloading music or movies that you don't own is illegal, I agree with them there.

However this "belief" is just horse poo poo. Is their goal now to kill the MP3 player market and drive us back to portable CD players? It would seem so.

I realize that this is their opinion, hopefully they won't convince a judge/senator/congressman that they are right.

Re:These people really don't get it do they? (5, Insightful)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731689)

That isnt their goal at all, in fact, it's quite the opposite. They're trying to kill the CD market in favor of the online download business. Onine downloads do not give us the same rights that buying a CD does, in fact, we get less rights (seemingly only the limited right to play the song, and copy it to another medium a limited number of times). By making CDs more expensive or difficult to acquire, or incompatible with portable music players, they can cause the market to shift itself to mediums that they can better control, even before the CD becomes completely obsolete.

Re:These people really don't get it do they? (1)

RichMeatyTaste (519596) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731732)

I should have thought of that angle, because that certainly makes sense.
It seems like all these companies believe that owning a physical object isn't important to us as consumers. Apparently we don't care if we have a CD, just that we have the music.
This is of course a huge mistake, but I wonder if that even matters at this point. Too many consumers are willing to bend over and accept whatever they are given, no matter what the long term ramifications are.
The only hope at this point is that they get so batcrap crazy/greedy that they really do piss off the average consumer, only then might they feel it in their pocketbooks.

Re:These people really don't get it do they? (1)

Kirth (183) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731751)

Downloading music or movies that you don't own is illegal, I agree with them there.

Not necessarily. Depends on you legislation. Here in Switzerland it is legal. It is however illegal to upload music or movies to which you don't own the copyright.

Let me get this straight (5, Insightful)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731653)

"Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices."

I thought I was "licensing the content," not "buying the CD." Shouldn't I be able to put my licensed content wherever I want?

Until the companies offer free download replacement of the music I am (ahem) licensing, so I can store that content on a blank CD or wherever else I want, why should I care what they consider "affordable"?

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731705)

More so if you're licensing the content than shouldn't they provide free replacement CDs? I mean you're not paying for the CD then it's part of the license arrangement :-)

That and I agree with the dozens of other posters. RIAA can say whatever they want, what is actually law (specially in other countries) is another story alltogether.

Tom

Re:Let me get this straight (0, Redundant)

dan dan the dna man (461768) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731718)

interesting karma tactic, reproducing comments from an anonymous coward earlier in the thread [slashdot.org]

Re:Let me get this straight (2, Insightful)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731781)

Actually, that was me, but when I hit submit the screen went blank, and when I refreshed the Slashdot page it didn't show up, so I retyped the comment under my user name rather than AC. Since I own the copyright, I'm free to copy it to another location, albeit accidentally. :)

What rights? (5, Insightful)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731657)

If you ask me, the RIAA "enjoys" its copyrights a bit too much already. They're trying to transform the music industry from one in which you "buy a copy of a song" into one in which you "buy a limited licence to play the song" under which you have no fair use rights (since you dont actually own the copy, only the right to play it). This is bad for all of us, and I would suggest that companies like Apple really helped pull off the bait and switch. At this point, if people stopped using the online download services and started using CDs again instead (for the rights) the record companies would probably pull the CDs or encrypt them somehow so you still had to be bound by their overrarching licensing agreements.

Sorry guys, but I think the age of "my music" or "owning music" is dead, and currently in the process of being burried. This is just the latest shovel of dirt.

Re:What rights? (4, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731743)

Sorry guys, but I think the age of "my music" or "owning music" is dead, and currently in the process of being burried. This is just the latest shovel of dirt.

Last shovel of dirt, yes - But on the RIAA, not on our right to own our culture.

Slashdotters (and all people) need to keep in mind the difference between a major country's legal systems saying "fair use does not include a right to backups" and the RIAA spewing yet another round of customer-repelling male cow feces. The former means a lot of people turn into criminals overnight by the wave of the magic wand-of-exclusive-law. The latter means... Nothing at all.

April Fools Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731660)

I think I just spotted the first 2006 April Fools post on Slashdot, didn't I?

Legal Copies! (1)

Herkum01 (592704) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731661)

I stuck my CD in a copy machine and have 10~ printouts of the data side of the disk. Let them try and argue that is not Fair Use!

Affordable (2, Insightful)

maniac/dev/null (170211) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731662)

Metallica's Black Album - $18.98. [samgoody.com]
How affordable.

Re:Affordable (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731745)

Bernsein's complete recordings of Gustav Mahler for Deutsche Grammophon, $47.98 [amazon.com] plus $35.99 [amazon.com] plus $39.98 [amazon.com] for a total of $123.95 (yes, that's my latest purchase).

Affordable? moar liek exploitable amirite?

Who cares? (1)

Valhalla2113853211 (932247) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731664)

What power does the RIAA have? As far as I understand it they have no legal powers so who cares what they say? They can sue people over ripping cd's for an ipod, but then they'll have to go after some pretty powerful people (I remember reading something somewhere about Bush's ipod (maybe they should be encouraged to go after him as he should be able to fight back ..... with an army if necessary)).

Re:Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731692)

They have no legal power, but they have money, and in America, money talks. Do you have money? I thought so. RIAA 1, You 0.

Re:Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731707)

What power does the RIAA have? As far as I understand it they have no legal powers so who cares what they say?

They have money. Money buys politicians. Politicians make law. Therefore they have all the indirect legal powers they can afford.

Re:Who cares? (1)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731741)

They have the legal power of a thousand lawyers. If there is any way to bend, circumvent, abuse, misinterprete, twist or edit the law, that would profit them, they will find it.

Re:Who cares? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731780)

What power does the RIAA have?

The power to give vast quantities of money to politicians in, ahem, "campaign contributions", in exchange for sympathetic laws. And the power to have these laws adopted worldwide by proxy on account of a number of free trade agreements.

Seems to me the US legal system works something like DNS. One master server is updated, everything else gets the changes sooner or later.

Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (5, Informative)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731666)

Look it up. RIAA sued Creative in the early days of MP3 players and lost.

Not fair use (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731667)

They can say that all they want. Doesn't make it true, though.

Re:Not fair use (1)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731710)

Clearly you don't believe in sophistry :).

That's simply not true (5, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731669)

Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices.

I have several CDs that I couldn't replace easily. Sometimes they go out of print.

Re:That's simply not true (2, Informative)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731724)

We had a damaged legal copy of Windows CD at the university. The replacement disk costed over twice as much as the local (commercial) pirate charges for the CD and over 1/3 of the full licensed version.
We bought the CD from the pirate and later claimed it was a backup copy from before the original got scratched.

Re:That's simply not true (4, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731791)

I have a number of promotional give-away CD's.
These are perfectly legal, but some of the companies which distributed them no longer exist, so I cannot get copies from them even if I wanted to pay full price.

Sometimes entire companies go "out of print" too!

not fair?? yeah sure (1)

williamvergara (753363) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731670)

What is tha point with this people? Saying shuch stupid things aint not going to change peoples mind. And besides, once again (just like sony by himself did) they are attacking the wrong people (the ones thal legally purchase music). So it is not fail, if a i want to listen to music on the go, i have to use those "old fashioned" discmans. Yeah sure, not problem. Just like in the mid of the 90'. WTF!! This peple are crazy. Times are changing and so business practices. In order to survive record company should change their ideology and philosophy so like apple did (and im not a mac fanboy, but they have made all the right desisions in tha last years). I believe that in the future, musicians wont need this stupid buffers withing their music and people. If your music is good, than internet will be your friend and will help you all the way. Think about that? Well, the RIAA has, and they fear that. That is what all this problem is about. They are not bitching about their current incommings, they are bitching because they now a very dark future is upon them.

Desperate organizations (1)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731671)

do desperate things. Is this the beginning of the end for the RIAA and their music industry trust?

What a ripoff... (5, Funny)

IcePenguin2001 (518109) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731672)

RIAA Goon 1: Okay, so we want to make a bunch more money because we're greedy bastards. How do we do it?

RIAA Goon 2: Let's sell CDs covered with heroin! Then they'll need to keep buying more CDs to get their fix!

G1: Although we're above the law, I don't wanna use heroin. It's expensive.

G2: Hmm... I've got it! Let's charge them for something they ALREADY OWN!

G1: Great Scott!! Like what?

G2: We'll tell those suckers that ripping CDs to MP3 players (especially iPods!!) is illegal and that they'll need to buy DIGITAL (ooooh the d-word) music for their MP3 players.

G1: Brilliant! Except, we already said that was legal when we sued Grokster.

G2: Well, say now it isn't!! The dumb consumers bend to us!! We are above the law!!

G1: Well, all right. Good idea, Jim. I'm gonna go now, I have $2.4 million from Britney Spears' latest album to roll around in and wipe my ass with. See ya!

Re:What a ripoff... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731699)

Why wait? Just use online music stores like iTunes.

Or if you really want to protest, just become a huge pirate.

I use iTunes all the time but this article makes me want to pirate instead.

The end of CDs and albums (2, Insightful)

Charles Dodgeson (248492) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731673)

If they persuade me or the courts that they are right, then I believe that I've purchased my last CD. Surely they must realize that they are putting an end to the CD business this way, and therefore albums. As they say, we'll all use alternatives to buying CDs.

One possibility, however, is that they want to argue that we don't automatically have the right to make such copies of purchased CDs, but that they will grant us limited rights to do so. Or maybe they just aren't thinking.

In soviet russia.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731674)

In Soviet Russia, the RIAA rips YOU!

Legally speaking... (4, Insightful)

MaestroSartori (146297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731681)

...they could be correct. I don't know the law well enough to say - if memory serves correct, it gives some examples of things which are fair use, none of which include anything like backing up or shifting from one media to another for personal use. So yeah, technically they could be correct.

But I think most people would agree that fairness is also a moral concept, and in that sense it's obvious that it is indeed fair use to copy something you already have to your MP3 player or PC to listen to in a more convenient way.

Here's a hint to the lovely people at the RIAA and similar bodies around the world: if people can't use CDs in this kind of way, they won't buy them.

Re:Legally speaking... (1)

Miros (734652) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731737)

If you're right about "fair use" in and of itself not extended to this medium, then I hate to break it to you, but there is no "fair" right to reproduce someone elses property. They could even take this in a differnt direction and suggest that when you buy the CD you're actually buying a limited license to play the CD, but not to do anything else to it (like rip, or copy). If this is true, and the RIAA is not selling a CD, but the right to play it (as they are perfectly in their rights to do) then we could be in trouble.

Music CD-Rs? (2, Insightful)

ect5150 (700619) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731684)



Am I missing something here? Don't the RIAA get a cut from the music variety of CD-Rs (the kind that only work in the settop boxes, not PC burners? What are those for then? Those were sold to use as a way to make custom CDs by taking tracks from discs you already owned and mixing a perfect CD for yourself. Now, this isn't allowed? They need to get their arguments straight.

Congress was not impressed with their arguments (4, Informative)

lheal (86013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731687)

January 24 on C-SPAN there were hearings on Senator Smith's Broadcast Flag bill.

The RIAA spokesman said the Broadcast Flag was needed because with HD radio
(which is just digitial radio), now people could record music off the air
without paying for it. They want to stop that. They put forth the CD ripping argument, too, saying there was nothing to prevent people from copying songs willy-nilly and sharing them, denying royalties to the struggling artists.

The Senators didn't like his view at all. It seems that many of them have
IPods, and like to grab songs, interviews, and other audio so they can listen to
them on the plane! They like their Dean Martin as much as the kids like their Ice Masta Jam.

I was pleased to see liberals and conservatives both on the side of fair use,
rather than on the side of corporate profit. I think they've been getting mail.

The whole copyright story is madness.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731688)

The problem with the copyright system, as it is, is that the whole thing was setup at a time when information was not freely transferable. With the expansion of internet, the old system as it is simply doesn't make sense. We will probably have to endure much more madness before legislation catches up with current technology.

That's okay (1)

quokkapox (847798) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731694)

No problem. I won't be ripping any RIAA members' CDs because I AM NOT GOING TO BUY ANY CDs FROM THEM ANYMORE. I've had it with the suing of grandmothers and shortchanging of artists.

They can whine all they want about me ripping what I already own. Whatever.

Dead Record Industry, You've done a great job connecting with your customers. Promote those VPs who advocated this sort of crap, so the entire broken godforsaken industry can rot away faster....

Oh. Thanks for letting me know. (2, Insightful)

MartinG (52587) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731708)

I have been buying CDs and ripping them to play on my iRiver. I may as well just download them instead of buying in future if its just as illegal.

So if I break a CD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731715)

I buy another copy, and they get royalties twice.

Why? Have they done twice as much work? Have they had to do twice as much marketting? Have their overheads suddenly gone up because I broke a CD? All they have to do is replace the physical media.

And this is why... (1)

Goth Biker Babe (311502) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731722)

...all the music I buy on CD is from indie labels. On the whole the major labels are totally formulaic and boring anyway. If there's anything I am interested I buy it from iTunes and download.

The problem is older artists and back catalogue. Or it was until I discovered this place [simplyvinyl.com] . On Tuesday I received four more albums on lovely heavy weight vinyl which sounds wonderful on my audio and which is easy to rip with the right hardware.

What are we buying? (5, Interesting)

plumby (179557) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731730)

I'm a little confused. When I buy a CD, am I buying the physical disc, in which case I surely get the right to do with it as I see fit, or I'm buying the right to listen to the music, in which case the media that it's on should not be relevant.

I can fully understand (assuming that I am only buying the rights) that I can't legally copy the music and give/sell that to someone else, but I'm no longer clear on what 'buying' a CD actually buys me.

Dear RIAA, (4, Informative)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731731)

16 million iPod sales in 2005 alone. Nearly one billion songs purchased from iTMS. 90% and 70% market share respectively. Just thought I'd remind you that the market has spoken and you're old. In closing, screw you.

Sincerely,
Everyone

Affordable? (2, Insightful)

keyne9 (567528) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731733)

"Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices."


Let's see here.

Original CD price: $16.99
Backup CD price: $0.30

Any specific reason I should be required to pay approximately fifty-six times more money to replace a scratched/mutilated CD?

Is my iPod different from a cassette deck? (5, Insightful)

cob666 (656740) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731740)

How is ripping a CD I bought and listening to that music on my iPod different than recording a CD I bought onto a cassette and listening to that out of my boom box? Didn't the RIAA already have a 'fair use' tax placed on blank media that takes this into consideration?

What the RIAA doesn't realize is that there are quite a few people like me that ONLY purchase CDs so I can listen to them on my iPod. Before getting a portable mp3 player I would purchase perhaps one CD per year (I listened to the radio in my car and at work). Now I buy CDs so I have new content for my mp3 player.

The RIAA will be shooting themselves in their collective FOOT if they turn a CD into a 'limited playability license'. I for one would not buy another CD if I didn't have legal 'fair use' rights to the content.

I haven't bought a physical CD in years... (4, Insightful)

HaloZero (610207) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731746)

...and now I'm certainly not going to.

'Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices.'

Next, I'm sure they're going to say that copying the contents of a data CD (Microsoft Office, or Frontstep CRM) to a network software repository is infringant use on that license. Just prevents me from having to
  1. Find the CD once I know that I need it...
  2. Determine that the CD isn't being kept in the master disc binder...
  3. Determine which of my coworkers was the last to use it...
  4. Try to root through their crap in an attempt to find it.
Back to music discs, though.

So I'm not allowed to store the data on a networked disk drive to enjoy throughout my own personal network, nor am I allowed to play it on my own iPod, iPod Pico, or Rio Karma, or whatever the hell it is you kids have nowadays.

Am I breaking the 'license' I bought when I play it in a CD player with 120second or 300second skip protection? Technically, the data has been encoded to digital media, and is therefore must be mutable into a file format.

Online alternatives would seem like the solution. Because then I can just download an album, burn it to a disc, rerip it without copy protection, and REMEMBER THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

Seriously, this shit has got to stop. Maybe satelite radio is where it's at...

Replacement copies? (2, Insightful)

jesterpilot (906386) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731755)

So, would the honorable representant of the RIAA please explain me where i can get copies of albums by the Cranes [starblood.org] and other musicians who were dumped by record companies for making music which was not commercial enough?

So... (1)

chickenmouth (954940) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731760)

... if they're going to whine about it, why didn't they mention this sooner?

Good Ol' RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731761)

The RIAA is one of the few companies left that, no matter what the story, we can always legitimately bash. I wish it weren't so, but that's just the way they are.

What they are really saying (2, Insightful)

James McGuigan (852772) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731763)

What they are really saying is that they don't want to be relagated to the role of ISP, or even "content" provider - as these are fields that are becoming too comoditized and thus not profitable.

What they want to be is end to end "entertainment solution" providers, marketing a very specific "solution" for you entertainment needs, that can be specially tailored and marketed to your demographic defined needs. Unless they can control their product from end to end without any interference, redirection or alteration on the consumers end. Otherwise they cannot ensure that you obtain the full enjoyment of the product and maintain their marketing image.

A music CD is only meant to be played in a genuine, authorized and trusted music CD player. If you want to play the music on an iPod, then you must purchase the iPod comptable iTunes version of the song which is available at a reasonable price.

If you happen to want to access your content on a Linux PC, then you will have to wait until Linux users become a profitable and mainstream demographic that is willing to accept our Digital Rights Management software.

If its just as illegal to buy a CD and rip it (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14731786)

as it is to download that track from Kazaa then why bother buy the CD?

Media levy .... (2, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 8 years ago | (#14731797)

Well, here in Canada, a media levy has been charged on recordable media -- ostensibly to compensate the artists for 'stealing' their music. The only music I have has been purchased legally -- I have every single original CD. Somehow I doubt under their funding formulas any of the artists I listen to are actually being compensated under this levy. It probably all goes to the big mega acts; the smaller artists and the ones who have been long dead are probably ignored from this formula.

The only things I burn to disk are data, and mixed CDs for playing in my car. As far as I'm concerned, I've never stolen anything from them, and they're the ones stealing me by charging me this levy under the assumption I must be comitting theft.

They will never convince me that I don't have right of first sale on my CDs, and they will never convince me that I can't buy a CD and then listen to it on whatever device I wish to.

Someone really needs to stop this absurdity with the recording industries.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?