Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Teens Don't Think CD Copying is a Crime

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the don't-copy-that-floppy dept.

704

An anonymous reader writes "An article in the Orlando Sentinel reports on a poll done by the LA Times and Bloomberg. The informal study looked at teenager attitudes towards copying media. Only 31 percent said they thought it was illegal to copy a CD borrowed from a friend who had purchased it. Attitudes about ill-gotten media were less clear, and the article admits than even the legal system is slightly fuzzy on this issue." From the article: "Among teens aged 12 to 17 who were polled, 69 percent said they thought it was legal to copy a CD from a friend who purchased the original. By comparison, only 21 percent said it was legal to copy a CD if a friend got the music for free. Similarly, 58 percent thought it was legal to copy a friend's purchased DVD or videotape, but only 19 percent thought copying was legal if the movie wasn't purchased. Those figures are a big problem for the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America, both of which have spent millions of dollars to deter copying of any kind. The music industry now considers so-called 'schoolyard' piracy -- copies of physical discs given to friends and classmates -- a greater threat than illegal peer-to-peer downloading, according to the RIAA."

cancel ×

704 comments

Your education tax dollars... (5, Insightful)

Fyre2012 (762907) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939058)

... hard at work!

Re:Your education tax dollars... (5, Insightful)

DJ Rubbie (621940) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939074)

Education tax dollars, hard at work. Funny how you got modded off-topic with this statement. Those are the very cash RIAA will be seeking, and if their past behaviors are any indication, those are the funds they would like use to convince government and school board to use to counter 'school-yard piracy'. I won't be surprised if they strong arm their way into schools to make music copying via this method as severe as dealing drugs on school property. At the very least, we will likely be seeing more education campaigns against copyright infringement and equating that with theft in the near future.

Re:Your education tax dollars... (4, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939185)

What we need is anti-campaigns. Here's my idea. Show the victims of theft.. like a woman who has just had her handbag stolen. Crying, shocked, trying to tell a police officer what happened. Show someone freaking out when they discover that their car has been hot wired. Show people being laid off because the factory they worked in is being shutdown. For each one you have a caption that lists the crime. "Bag Snatch." "Grand Theft Auto." "Corporate Embezzlement." Then, finally, show a music executive, laughing, having lunch at some expensive restaurant, drinking fine wine, getting some young artist to sign on the dotted line. "Copyright Infringement" [fade to black] "It's NOT theft."
   

Cut. Try another scene. (4, Insightful)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939254)

Then, finally, show a music executive, laughing, having lunch at some expensive restaurant, drinking fine wine, getting some young artist to sign on the dotted line. "Copyright Infringement" [fade to black] "It's NOT theft."

You've got the wrong image, there. You need footage of a teenager actually getting to meet his all-time favorite talent. You know, right there in the green room, for a one-on-one with, say... I don't know, Green Day or Avril Lavigne. The teenager says to Green Day, "Dudes! You guys totally rock. You're like the soundtrack of my life - I listen to you all the time, and I really can't wait for that next CD you're working on. I know you've been working on it all year and everything, but you won't mind if I just rip my copy off, right? I mean, I love you guys, just not enough to actually pay you what you're asking for your work. You know, a buck a song is totally unfair to me, personally, even though I want you to entertain me even more in the future, cuz you guys just totally kill with your songs about The Man and everything. Hey, are you going to eat that extra back-stage food? One of those club sandwiches would go great with my $3.75 half-caffe-double-shot-no-whip-skinny-iced-latte."

Re:Cut. Try another scene. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939262)

Wow, did copyright infringement run over your dog or something?

hah! (1, Insightful)

Phil Urich (841393) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939279)

I have no mod points, so I will simply reply with a "lol!"

Because yes, indeed, I did laugh out loud. Parent, that was the perfect response to Grandparent, bravo!

Re:Cut. Try another scene. (1, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939288)

99% of artists would say "yeah man, our record company is a drag, don't give em a dime" and if they didn't I wouldn't fuckin' listen to em in the first place, because that's the rock and roll attitude. Of course, if you're into rap music they probably wouldn't have let you back stage without paying $899 already. In *any* case, you're not going to see musicians who are actually *hurt* by copyright infringement because *none of them are*.

Re:Cut. Try another scene. (4, Funny)

enjahova (812395) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939304)

Then the RIAA exec walks up to the kid, empties his pockets and stuffs the valuables and cash into his own. He then tosses the major artist a couple coins. Finally he spits on the kid and says to him "let that be a lesson to ya" in a mafioso voice.

This is fun, I think I'll start casting for my own PSA

Of COURSE it's not theft (4, Insightful)

Prof. Pi (199260) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939204)

At the very least, we will likely be seeing more education campaigns against copyright infringement and equating that with theft in the near future.

Of course enjoying the fruits of someone's work without paying for it (when they expect to be paid) isn't theft!

Last night I went to see a movie I've been looking forward to all summer. And the cool part was, it was free! You see, the guy who takes the tickets at the theater is kind of old and it's easy to sneak by him. Geez, they're not even going to try to protect their rights! Anyway, it's not theft, because there were empty seats in the theater, so they weren't going to get any money even if I didn't go. And besides, everything Hollywood produces is crap.

Then I took the subway home. It didn't cost me anything because I jumped the turnstile. One of my friends said I was committing "theft" -- obviously he can't think for himself. I mean, the city was running the train anyway, and there were empty seats. Besides, the subway sucks, and they fill the route with lots of stops I'm not interested in (I only want to pay for the stop next to the theater and the one near my apartment).

There used to be a bus line that was more convenient, but the city shut it down, with some lame excuae about not making enough money to justify the expense. That just shows that they suck and don't deserve my money anyway! Fight the Man! Transportation wants to be free!

I probably won't go to that theater any more. I heard they're installing some new "security system" to prevent people from getting in without paying. That really pisses me off! How dare they! It just goes to show how evil they are. And besides, it serves them right if they lose money -- watching movies in a big theater with other people is an outdated business model!

Re:Of COURSE it's not theft (4, Insightful)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939267)

Of course enjoying the fruits of someone's work without paying for it (when they expect to be paid) isn't theft!

Yes, you're right! I don't have time now to read the rest of your excellent comment, but it's good to see that some people at least understand the difference betwen "theft" and "infringement".

Re:Of COURSE it's not theft (3, Insightful)

rinkjustice (24156) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939282)

Please don't confuse copyright infringement with theft. It's annoying and you sound brainwashed.

Re:Your education tax dollars... (1)

eonlabs (921625) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939218)

The best part is if this IS the direction they go, that's fewer tax dollars spent on education, which means our goal of teaching our kids how to take tests better may fail as badly as preparing kids for the world after highschool.

What they don't tell you (5, Funny)

AndresCP (979913) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939063)

in a related study, 95% of teenagers said they don't care if its legal, they want their goddamn Kanye West CD.

Re:What they don't tell you (1)

misey (996068) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939090)

YES YES!! it's amazing that in this country, 10 year olds can be criminals by listening to music. I'd rather the teenagers listening to music than smoking crack. That's what I'd do without online pirating, lol.

Re:What they don't tell you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939136)

Um, they aren't mutually exclusive. The little brats can smoke crack, have unprotected sex, spraypaint the side of the local 7/11, and also pirate music. Heck, they might even be building pipe bombs.

In my opinion, we should crack down hard on music and game pirating. After all if less music and games are pirated, the less kids will be listening or playing violent games. And we know that violent games and music lead to every type of deviant behavior. Where's Jack Thompson when you need him?

Re:What they don't tell you (1)

ThePengwin (934031) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939200)

upon further investigation: only 53% of people like Kanye West, but this is still higher than the RIAA's favorite rating, still remaining at 0%

You want to know what is a crime? (4, Insightful)

abscissa (136568) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939065)

You want to know what is a crime? I'll tell you what is a crime. It's a crime that these large organisations reap the profits from pressed pieces of plastic onto which are recorded hideous noises that sound like gang-warfare in Harlem and Watts, and then use this money to harass families and children for every last red cent so they can line their pockets.

So yeah, copying a CD is not a crime.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Crowhead (577505) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939133)

Heh, the old "It sucks, therefore copying is not a crime" argument. If it sucks, why are you stealing it?

Actually, I find these numbers kind of refreshing. The kids are essentially admitting that copying music/movies off the net is a crime. They feel a little justified in 'borrowing' it when they personally know someone who payed for it.

Bottom line - even 12 - 17 year olds know in their heart of hearts that they are stealing.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (3, Funny)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939166)

That's the most bazaar line of reasoning I've ever heard.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Crowhead (577505) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939189)

Yes, I bought my reasoning at a street market...

I bought the two-pack: Kid's friend bought it, copying it is ok. Kid's friend stole it, copying it not so ok. That's what the numbers say.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939219)

Which would clearly seem to indicate that kid's consider copying not to be the same as stealing. I'm sure they'd feel the same way about lending. If you lend me your copy of Time Cop that you bought from the supermarket I would feel that was a-ok (even though the MPAA would say it wasn't). If you lend me your copy of Time Cop that you stole from the local video store, I would feel that wasn't a-ok. Maybe this is because kids have been exposed to less ant-copying propaganda than you.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (3, Insightful)

Rix (54095) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939216)

Stealing is always illegal, but not everything that is illegal is stealing.

Don't like that we pass around cultural artifacts freely? Tough shit. You're on the wrong side of history, and you can't stop us. Society adapts to new technology, not the other way around.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1)

abscissa (136568) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939217)

Heh, the old "It sucks, therefore copying is not a crime" argument. If it sucks, why are you stealing it?

Curiously enough, I never made that argument, so you're fighting a straw man. I pointed out that the music sucks and they want more money, and that's the real crime.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1)

Anonymous Crowhead (577505) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939234)

Straw man?

You claim the music sucks, and 'The man' uses the profits to harass 'po peoples' and then magically deduce that copying a CD is not a crime?

Straw man? That's straw man. But it's still the essence of your argument.

Either way, your logic sucks.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1, Offtopic)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939281)

The tastes of most teenagers is fickle, as most listen to whatever's "cool" at the moment (and of course, "cool" is defined by influential peers). Not to turn this into an uphill, both way-type statement, but does anyone actually think that any of the current pop/rap music will be appreciated 20 years from now?

Yup, I'm an old fart, and my generation's music is better than yours. By the way, get off my lawn, you nogoodnik scallywags!

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1)

Coneasfast (690509) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939168)

what you are talking about is crime to humanity, not crime as in disobeying the law. too bad both of those don't coincide (at least not in the US).

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (5, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939172)

You want to know what is a crime?

It would certainly be a help, given the topic.

A crime is what you can be prosecuted for by the state and do jail time for. Something found in the criminal code.

What if copying a CD were a civil violation, between private interested parties? Something could be illegal and yet not be a crime. What a crazy world that would be, huh? If only.

KFG

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (1)

kz45 (175825) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939195)

"You want to know what is a crime? I'll tell you what is a crime. It's a crime that these large organisations reap the profits from pressed pieces of plastic onto which are recorded hideous noises that sound like gang-warfare in Harlem and Watts, and then use this money to harass families and children for every last red cent so they can line their pockets."

it's a crime that artists charge thousands of dollars for some paint on a canvas, so counterfeiting said painting and passing it off as the original should not be a crime.

yes, they shouldn't be harassing families.

However, if you sell a piece of shit and someone decides to buy it, you aren't committing a crime. People continue to buy the shit that the RIAA creates, it should be *no* suprise that they continue to sell it. If you want to blame someone, blame the mindless sheep for buying the crappy britney spears CDs of the world.

Re:You want to know what is a crime? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939245)

Talking about paintings, it's not a crime, but it's a SICK JOKE that a Picasso is worth more than a Rockwell, a Dalí, or a Barks. In my opinion, people who spend millions in that cubist shit are also mindless sheep!

so sad.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939068)

The numbers should be 100% 'legal/OK' for copying a bought CD/DVD.

Orlando is.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939070)

A fudge packing district.

Re:Orlando is.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939205)

That's so gay.

Pitiful that is... (5, Informative)

cronostitan (573676) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939071)

In Germany the copy from a legally bought CD given to a close friend is legal. So the law was made according to the natural feeling of the public.

Although that copying has been limited recently by the addidion 'you may copy - but not if the media is protected by a _WORKING_ digital protection'. Well.. most CD anti-copy schemes today are easy to overcome and this very soft rule has not been tested in court yet. The musiv industry just plainly tries to keep their too high prices up by suing everyone around and lobbying for more limiting laws.

Greater Threat? (3, Interesting)

dyamkovoy (993805) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939073)

a greater threat than illegal peer-to-peer downloading, according to the RIAA

Yes, because, at least for p2p, they have their sueing and scare-tactics. The RIAA didn't get their claws on CD-burning technology early enough to prevent its use for pirating music, so they see it as a greater threat.

Its True (1)

in2mind (988476) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939087)

I dont know if it should be called "crime", but I agree teens dont realise its wrong to copy everything from friend and not buy.

I have a friend,who is well off,can very easily afford to by a CD.But,sadly,all he does is only copy from friends CD or worse coy from friend's mp3 and pop it into the car & go.

I once asked him about buying,he said "I dont have a habit og buying.Just listen and go!"

All this doesnt mean I support DRM though.

Re:Its True (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939293)

"teens dont realise its wrong to copy everything from friend and not buy"

actually it is not wrong , on the contrary, where i live it is good to share information and aid friends. by making copy of information i ease it spread and harm noone. Biz models that work on artificial scarcity are evil in their nature. We already have enough problems with natural scarcity of material resources why wold we bring in yet artificial scarcity ?

Re:Its True (1)

custardman (996434) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939295)

One of the problems is the insane price (in Australia) of Digital music downloads Itunes: $1.69 Ninemsn: bout the same, but doesn't play on non-DRM machines I woke up one morning, felt really guilty and deleted all my p2p music, got a allofmp3.com account, and purchased the .oggs for 17c or so a pop My friend recently asked for a cd mix, so I purchased $6.00 worth of music of allofmp3.com, The main thing is the warm and fuzzys I get from paying for something - makes me appreciate it more Pete

What happend to Fair Use (2, Insightful)

siuengr (625257) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939095)

I thought it was ok to copy CD's and VHS, didn't they decided that was legal in the 80's? As far as I know that hasn't been overturned. The only thing that makes copying DVD's illegal is the encryption. Regular CD's are still fair game, right?

Re:What happend to Fair Use (4, Informative)

terrymr (316118) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939116)

Audio home recording act ... the one that requires cd recorders to include the Serial Copy Management System also allows copying for private use i.e. to play in the car, give to your friend etc.

Re:What happend to Fair Use (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939310)

"Personal noncommercial use" was not defined. It does not imply that distribution is legal, which remains verboten under the copyright code itself. "Personal" means "you."

It was amended by the No Electronic Theft Act which defined "receipt" as "financial gain," and thus prohibited, so even if by some twisted logic giving it to your friend is legal, his taking it is not.

KFG

Re:What happend to Fair Use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939139)

This is completely legal in Canada, read the actual legal text here [justice.gc.ca] . Odd how it only applies to musical performances, but I digress. It's generally accepted that its not legal according to the copyright laws of the United States. You poor folks south of the 49th parallel want more freedom? Invite the Canadian goverment to implement a "regime change" for you. Or better yet, get off your butts and overthrow your own government.

Re:What happend to Fair Use (4, Informative)

Workaphobia (931620) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939156)

No, the fact that CDs are not encrypted does not mean that you are allowed to copy them without restriction. Fair Use allows you to make backup copies, or create copies for your car, or rip them to your computer, but you are not allowed to give a copy of the CD to someone else. That's unauthorized redistribution, and is not even close to a legitimate use. AFAIK lending the CD to a friend, provided that copies are not made, is fine. Although I suppose there might be an issue if you lend the CD while using a backup copy for yourself at the same time. I'm not sure.

You might be referring to time shifting devices, which were ruled legal decades ago.

The same Fair Use rights apply to DVDs. The difference is that the CSS encryption in commercial DVDs qualifies as an "effective technological measure" under the DMCA. Tools that are capable of breaching such technological measures cannot be distributed. So while you have a right to rip a DVD that you own to your hard drive under linux, it's illegal for someone else to make available to you the program needed to do that.

This article (or rather, its summary, as I did not RTFA) does not mention teen opinions of legitimate copies, but only illegal copying for friends.

Please correct me if I said anything inaccurate.

Re:What happend to Fair Use (1)

siuengr (625257) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939232)

I suppose I was confused on this point myself. I interpeted the "sharing with friends" no different that making a copy for them. I read that it explicitly states that you can let them borrow a cd or movie, but not make a copy for them.

RIAA lawsuits (1)

CriminalNerd (882826) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939096)

I sure hope the RIAA won't use these figures as an excuse to restart their litigation campaigns again. Given the RIAA's history, I wouldn't be surprised though...

Threat Matrix (5, Funny)

Ray Radlein (711289) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939098)

In further news, the RIAA and MPAA have recently decided that everything is, in fact, a greater threat than everything else. "We intend to launch our initial wave of lawsuits against everything very soon," said industry spokesman Blodug Fossergrim. "Everything else will have to wait."

Another misleading poll... (3, Informative)

xiando (770382) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939100)

It must be noted that NOT ALL CD OR DVD MEDIA SOLD IS COPYRIGHTED.

Many artists - and DVD video creators - encurage you to copy and spread their work/information.

Thus; just asking "is it legal to copy a CD" is misleading.

For example, the documenaties you can download from http://torrentchannel.com/ [torrentchannel.com] are completely legal to copy and share with your friends.

It is legal to copy a CD you made with a song you wrote yourself where you yourself are singing.

It is not legal to copy a CD where the copyright belongs to some member of the very evil MPAA.

Thus; it is a bit stupid to just ask "Is it legal to copy a CD", the obvious answer to that question is "YES, it IS LEGAL - unless the Copyright holder of the work on that CD objects to it"...

Stop confusing the issue with the truth! (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939142)

Those damn schoolyard pirates are putting the hardworking executives of the music industry out of their much deserved billion dollar salaries and forcing them to live on a mere handfull of millions like paupers.

You, sir, are the enemy of every true businessman by trying to draw attention to the rights of people who should have no other rights, nay duties, then to hand over their money to those who deserve it.

Your entire argument is exactly what the content industry doesn't want to get out. ALL copying period is illegal. That is why in many countries now you pay money to the content industry for blank media even if you fill it with your own content.

I still hope that a really good honest laywer will one day make a case about this and get the politicians involved convicted for fraud.

Re:Another misleading poll... (4, Insightful)

Prof. Pi (199260) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939146)

Thus; it is a bit stupid to just ask "Is it legal to copy a CD", the obvious answer to that question is "YES, it IS LEGAL - unless the Copyright holder of the work on that CD objects to it"...

IABAL, but I thought that under the default definition of copyright, you can't legally make a copy. That's why the GPL has to spell it out. So, your statement would be more properly stated as "No, it is not legal, unless the Copyright holder of the work on that CD explicitly permits it."

Re:Another misleading poll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939231)

Whoa there cowboy! (Gee, like I havn't seen that enough on /.), but you mean to tell me that giving my friend a copy of Debian (on CD) is legal now? No! The RIAA/MPAA have declared that all copying is illegal (up to the death penalty)! Even if licences allow copying, and every contributing person to the content on that disk wants it spread as far and wide as possible, the MPAA/RIAA have declared unilaterally and universally that it should not be allowed, and that you ought to be sued for mere reasons of spite! As for artists recording music to CD's and then *GIVING* these to their friends, this is also instantly illegal! You must, *MUST* submit your work to the RIAA/MPAA where they will process the disk, Brittanyize it, and then charge your friend $19.99 for the disk (taking the tiniest 40% they can). Think hard about it. It's really the best for you. If you don't agree, well then they will sue (both you and your friend). So there! You shouldn't be allowed to give things like this to your friend as gifts either! SO QUIT IT,
 
  sincerely,

MPAA/RIAA

-looking out for your best interests (or at least their best interests),
whether you want them to or not

Of course they dont, because it isn't. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939105)

Read Orson Scott Card's Essay on this: http://greghowley.com/20 [greghowley.com]

He favors decent IP laws, but points out that the RIAA and their greedy counterparts around the world rip off both customers and artists. The web allows self-publishing. Use it.

Re:Of course they dont, because it isn't. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939147)

What depths are we sinking to if we choose OSC as a moral arbiter?

Well... (1)

Lithgon (896737) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939106)

Those who want to control the flow of information with to control you. Beware, zombies lie ahead!

...AND!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939108)

...AND Americans don't think that lying about "Weapons of Mass Distruction" and starting an illegal war is an indictable offence and punishable crime!! OR EVEN A PROBLEM AT ALL!!

Good GOD, where DO these Teens get their morality from!?!?

Re:...AND!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939272)

"Illegal" war, by what law? Let me tell you something: in case you missed this detail, Iraq was a brutal dictatorship. And, mind you, dictatorships have no right to sovereignity. Any free country had the moral right to invade Iraq to overthrow Saddam, at any time they felt like!

What's funny (4, Insightful)

misey (996068) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939112)

What's funny is that we suddenly have 10 year olds with a criminal record because they took advantage of a service available on pretty much every computer. I'm not putting a dent in studio sales by downloading a movie. They hardly make anything on the DVD sales compared to ticket sales. Didn't they teach us on Sesame Street to share?

Re:What's funny (3, Interesting)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939291)

Have you heard what conservative wealthy folks say about Sesame Street? Suffice it to say they hate it and think it's liberal commie trash. I've heard some pretty angry rants about SS from some higher ups at corporations and some wall street types. Obviously they were never shown it as a kid.

Re:What's funny (1)

flooey (695860) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939301)

I'm not putting a dent in studio sales by downloading a movie. They hardly make anything on the DVD sales compared to ticket sales.

That's not quite right. DVD sales are extremely profitable. Slate has a breakdown [slate.com] of the way studios make money. For 2004, they have a loss of $2.22 billion on $7.4 billion in ticket sales compared to a profit of $13.95 billion on $20.9 billion in video sales.

whatever, (1)

Tsiangkun (746511) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939117)

If CDs are made illegal, I'll go back to the tape cassette. I have the technology !

You have a tape player? (1)

jdbartlett (941012) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939160)

Wow, you must be one of those early adopters.

Gasp! (1)

Thakandar2 (260848) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939119)

The music industry now considers so-called 'schoolyard' piracy -- copies of physical discs given to friends and classmates -- a greater threat than illegal peer-to-peer downloading, according to the RIAA.

I can see some RIAA rep running around junior high schools and handing out a subpoena to every kid with a portable CD player with a burned disc inside.

No wonder the RIAA is pissed (4, Insightful)

NexFlamma (919608) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939123)

The teenage demographic is their prime target. They want these kids to continue to consume the music they put out without questioning it, thusly creating a pattern for them to follow their entire lives.

Thankfully, these kids have decided that it's more reasonable to think that sharing music with friends of yours isn't a crime. This creates panic in the RIAA because if enough people come to think that way, it suddenly won't be illegal. As much as you can say that the law will still be on the books, if enough people are breaking the law, how well does that law hold up?

These kids are just exhibiting common sense, and common sense is the enemy of the **AA's.

Re:No wonder the RIAA is pissed (1)

Workaphobia (931620) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939202)

Yep. The entire point of aggressive DRM and litigation is not to actually make money (I'm almost certain it has to cost many times more to sue filesharers than they can possibly make out of settlements), but to solidify the idea that "This is our music, keep your grubby copying paws off!" They ??AAs win if they can successfully convince the public that filesharing is illegal, DRM is the norm, and copyrights are supposed to last two lifetimes. As long as our rights are taken away gradually enough, the public may not notice.

Re:No wonder the RIAA is pissed (2, Insightful)

budgenator (254554) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939208)

with music getting played on the radio for "free" it's hard for me to get excited about a bootlegged copy of a cd or a party cd of MP3's; even thoe I know it;'s technically wrong. If these guys at the 'AAs think the schoolyards are a nest of pirates, they should visit a few factories arround here.

Re:No wonder the RIAA is pissed (1)

MagicAlex84 (991508) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939280)

I see news reports about murders all the time, and last time I checked nobody wants murder to be legal.

The pure and simple truth (5, Insightful)

IlliniECE (970260) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939129)

The RIAA brought this on themselves with an aging business model where media sells for far more than its worth to many consumers.

Is it wrong? (4, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939134)

Is it right to deny your friend a copy of your CD because some company claims to own the right to make copies of it? It's a stark moral choice: do you help your friend or do you defend the rights of the owner? It's pretty obvious to me which one is right. Unfortunately it's probably just as obvious to others that I'm wrong.

Re:Is it wrong? (5, Interesting)

Surt (22457) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939236)

I think on a moral level, it's fairly straightforward. Consider free speech. Should any entity or company be able to restrict what you can say, if what you say is not physically threatening anyone? Most rational people would say no. So start reading the ones and zeros off of your cd.

Should any entity or company be able to restrict what you are allowed to write down, or remember? No again. So record the spoken ones and zeros to cd.

Any restriction on such activity is clearly immoral, and the other side hasn't a leg to stand on.

Re:Is it wrong? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939253)

It's not just about that. Look, even if you buy into the mainstream lie that copyright is good for society, you are still faced with this stark moral choice. Should you do what is best for society or what is best for your friend? Does the local, immediate situation in which you are involved trump the intellectual, greater good?

Allow me to make an example (note: THIS IS NOT AN ANALOGY).

Most people would agree that eating other human beings is a bad thing, for society.
If you are starving to death and there's nothing else to eat, would you eat another human being?
What if you had to kill them first?

It's not a question of whether or not you should be held accountable for these actions. That's a different issue. It's about whether or not you choose the greater thing over your friend. Again, to some people it is obvious, you always put society's needs above your own and your friends. To others it's equally obvious, society can go hang, a friend in need is a friend in deed.

Yep... (5, Informative)

cbirkett (904502) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939137)

This is completely legal [neil.eton.ca] here in Canada.

Re:Bwahaha! (2, Interesting)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939169)

If you are a manufacturer or importer, you can avoid the levy entirely on your products as long as you record some sound on the media before you sell it. The sound recorded on the media can even be erased. Clearly this is not an option for CD-Rs, but for devices that include a hard drive, simply recording a sound on the drive and then erasing it exempts the drive from the levy. This is because (as the legislation now stands) "blank audio recording medium means a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto which a sound recording may be reproduced, that is of a kind ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose and on which no sounds have ever been fixed..."
So THAT'S why there was a track on my MP3 player when I bought it! Wal-Mart and/or RCA is apparently awesome.

Interesting (2, Insightful)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939140)

I wonder if on the grand scheme of things whether the RIAA et al's resistance to free copying will end up being an endnote in history books because later generations will simply ignore them, thinking (and rightly so) that they are living in the past?

Why should they have to limit themselves simply because the recording companies refuse to adapt?

23 comments, not one good (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939143)

Tomorrow's headline: Teenagers are not literate in copyright laws! There was the same response as this to the article about evolution illiteracy. The average person simply doesn't know.

Re:23 comments, not one good (4, Funny)

Chaffar (670874) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939190)

Tomorrow's headline: Teenagers are not literate in copyright laws! There was the same response as this to the article about evolution illiteracy. The average person simply doesn't know.

Doesn't know, and doesn't care... Apathetic and amoral are the values that prevail today. Not that it's a bad thing, mind you. But I would've preferred to hear that Teens don't think copying CD's is illegal in a defiant stand against the RIAA, "THE RIAA CAN SUCK ON THESE", said one young man as he pointed his two index fingers to the sky, instead of I want to listen to MY Justin Timberlake/Ciara/Fergie and nobody's gonna stop me...

The average person? (1)

MMaestro (585010) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939287)

I've been following the copyright argument ever since Napster started the war in 2000 and I STILL don't understand copyright laws. Whats this bullshit about "copy protection circumventing", "fair use" and "copyright infringement"? Who the fuck are the MPAA and the RIAA? How the hell does "P2P" work? Why the hell is it called "P2P" when it should be called "PtP"?

If they need more money, play more concerts (2, Insightful)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939145)

I personally don't go to any concerts because the price of a ticket is inflated. I'd pay 10$ for a show of musician I wanted to see, but not $50 and upwards per seat. At $10 a seat, the musicians and everyone involved would still get paid. I think the problem comes in that if they add in additional supply(extra days playing concert), the demand would be satisfied too much, and they'd be unable to charge the inflated price for the tickets. So instead of playing a $50 concert one day, and a $10 one the next, they'd be playing maybe two concerts for $20 a piece for a loss of $20 per ticket and extra work involved(theoretically). I know they're aiming for the profit mark on the supply/demand curve and not caring about the public's greater interest. I guess this is where fanboys come in. They buy the tickets for the inflated price, never knowing its inflated, while the people who have some demand, but less are left to skip the concert and listen to the CD. Even if mega musicians in today's age never sell an album because of piracy, they could technically just start playing more concerts and still make way more money than your average man.

Re:If they need more money, play more concerts (1)

benicillin (990784) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939274)

too bad most musicians already max out the number of concerts they can put on (think transportation time between shows). add in the price that venues have to pay to rent/power/book the gigs and you begin to understand why tickets cost what they do. i'm not saying they don't make a generous profit from $60 dollar dave matthews tickets. there are just too many players involved in setting up concerts and they all want their share of the profit. that's why we should all listen to death metal, it's much more affordable.

It's only natural (5, Funny)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939154)

It's only natural for a kid to share their favorite music with their friends. The only part of this that should be criminal is the quality of the music being exchanged in these swaps.

Re:It's only natural (1)

KloroFormd (996425) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939192)

I'd say they should do a study, and should make it legal to share files with the equivelent quality of an average 64kbps, 22khz, joint stereo MP3.

Re:It's only natural (1)

SCPRedMage (838040) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939309)

I think that he was referring to the music itself be crap, not the quality of the digital version...

Ep!)! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939176)

things in Become like they At this p0int Were compounded something ccol OpenBSD. How many guest and never get

They don't value other people's effort (4, Interesting)

Aussie_Scribe (899692) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939179)

Let me stake out a position here:

  1. I think that most people who are happy to freely duplicate copyrighted works have never been in the position of selling anything of their own.

  2. I think that people who sell their own materials (be it books, music, software etc.) are more likely to be aware of the effort that creators put into their creations. Such people are more likely to identify with fellow creators. They are thus less willing to duplicate material without fair recompense because they know how wretched they feel when they see copies being made of their own materials.

  3. These beliefs lead me to make the following testable proposition: A person who starts selling their own original materials will be less willing to duplicate the copyrighted works of other people.

I welcome informed discussion. Of course, this is Slashdot, so I expect the signal-to-noise ratio to be woeful!

AussieScribe

Re:They don't value other people's effort (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939227)

I believe a true artist would want the largest possible audience to witness their works and the only way to achieve this is free distrobution of their work. I also believe every man should be compensated for their work at least to that of a living wage. In the Bible, the temple musicians left to work in their fields because they stopped recieving pay. If I continue with this line of reasoning, I'll just be concluding at concerts FTW again. Man, how cool would it be if concerts only cost $10-$15, and the food/drinks not to be overpriced. Someone should really write Record Company Tycoon. That game could let you be cool and serve the people, or be greedy and line your pockets with cash. Of course if you're cool and serving the people, the other Record Companies may start issuing hitmen out on your bands and locales for concerts, or maybe smuggling in hooligans into your concerts to Mosh when its a 98 degrees concert, ruining your image. Because you know if just one record company came out to be really cool, it'd start to topple the greedy people as a whole. Kinda like Opec, where if some companies decided to flood the market with oil, gas prices wouldn't drop significantly, but they'd make a killing. Then if more companies decided to try and cash in, eventually the market would cave, and gas would be down to $1 a gallon or less.

Re:They don't value other people's effort (4, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939263)

I would guess that:
1. Is just wrong. Surely a good fraction of people have tried to market their artistic work at some point. And in slashdot, I would expect that proportion to be nearly 100% given the nature of the audience.

2. With or without any experience trying to sell an artistic work, surely an even larger proportion of the population has at least created an artistic work and can appreciate the effort involved. And surely many can appreciate the joy of seeing their materials being copied, rather than feeling wretched. Not everyone is a control freak, and real artists want their works to be appreciated by as wide an audience as possible, regardless of recompense.

3. Would obviously need to be settled by experiment, but I think the experiment is doomed due to the definitional difficulties (just how much selling of their own materials is required?)

You don't value other people's interest... (4, Insightful)

patrixmyth (167599) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939285)

Let me stake out a consumer viewpoint...

Perhaps you've got some talent that is vaguely interesting to me...

I don't owe you anything, but I choose to SUPPORT your expression by listening/reading/watching and sharing the news with others...

At some point in the process you are just pleased as hell that anybody cares at all...

Soon your art is broadcast over airwaves onto my property, into my car, on commercials between my kids cartoons, on my elevator and your excerpts are slipped into the pages between jumk mail that's dropped in my mailbox uninvited. You sell your services to advertisers/promoters who are trying to take my money. Your clothes line is produced by third world sweatshops and sells for 3X more than the generic brand. You are trying to sell me a perfume with your name on it (and some pimple cream too) and you have a commercial on the air urging me to imbibe addictive substances so I can get a "free" mp3. You sell pictures of your frigging baby to the news media.

Do I protect your financial interests when my friend asks to copy a song? Probably not...

Wait, you're not THAT artist? You're struggling, selling CDs at your show and living at home waiting for your big break? Ah, then, nevermind, because nobody is copying your damn CD!

ART is not some magic invisible soul cream. If you are selling your art, then you are selling your thoughts. Good luck to you on that, but don't cry about how people are stealing your thoughts. That's just crazy talk. Unless someone steals the plastic you bought and put your thoughts on, then they didn't steal anything from you. A law may say that its theft to listen/read/watch your creativity uninvited, but laws also once valued some people at a fraction of the value of others. Laws are just constructs of the general consensus, and that consensus is changing.

Re:You don't value other people's interest... (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939314)

If you are selling your art, then you are selling your thoughts.

BS. You are selling your work to pay for your existence while you created that work. Obviously you've never worked on anyting complex, time-consuming, or that involved large numbers of people, lots of equipment, professional skills, and so on.

Do you really think that a stellar new recording of 50-seat studio orchestra's performance of symphony is nothing more that someone's thoughts? You can't be that naive, which means you are just trolling, and badly.

At some point in the process you are just pleased as hell that anybody cares at all...

Spoken like someone who's pretty sure that would really want your work. That's fine, if that's how you feel. Many people with an urge to create something as a form of other people's entertainment take a while to realize that they're not one of the truly talented, dedicated people whose work will really be sought out.

A law may say that its theft to listen/read/watch your creativity uninvited, but laws also once valued some people at a fraction of the value of others. Laws are just constructs of the general consensus, and that consensus is changing.

And some laws make sense. Ironically, you've juxtaposed exactly the two most perfect examples: you're alluding to the days of slavery, while at the same time inferring that it's perfectly reasonable to make a hardworking artist your own private little entertainment slave. How enlightened of you!

Re:They don't value other people's effort (1)

xigxag (167441) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939316)

Let me stake out a position here:

      1.

            I think that most people who are happy to freely duplicate copyrighted works have never been in the position of selling anything of their own.


Most people... have never been in a position of selling anything of their own, period, so what you're saying is correct in a trivial sense. In any significant sense, I think it is not the case. Most of the people I know who are musical artists have plenty of bootlegged tapes and CDs in their posession. Certainly they don't have any problem making photocopies of copyrighted materials.

Teens don't think... (1)

Browzer (17971) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939187)

especially lately!

basic question (3, Insightful)

Cally (10873) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939210)

sample size?

There's only one option... (2, Funny)

Iron Clad Burrito (231521) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939211)

**AA needs to just sue the f**k out of the kids. I mean, it's been an effective tactic so far...

Parents taught us sharing is good (1)

Falcon040 (915278) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939226)

Parents, for hundreds of generations, in their kindness of human nature, have always taught their children that if there is no loss to the sharer, then sharing is good.

After thousands of years of being taught this, from one generation to the next, whilst still being taught this, we are being sued by collectives of people in companies under the law now set by our granddads (55-75 year olds) in power. These laws were set so that certain collectives could make significantly extra profit without contributing more work to society, to the significant detriment of the children of today and the next generations.

Is this the same RIAA . . . (2, Insightful)

cadeon (977561) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939241)

. . . that said P2P file sharing was a silver bullet that was going to destroy their whole business? Now they are saying that 'Schoolyard Piracy' is more of a threat? Schoolyard Piracy has been around Forever. Ever since cassette recorders hit wal-mart shelves, people have been copying each other's purchased music. And it was probably going on before then, but I wasn't around so I wouldn't know. Even though people were copying music from each other in this physical, sneakernet, manner, the recording industry (and, comparatively, software industry) flurrished. And aside from the occational 'copying is bad' print ad, the music industry never cared. What changed? People also used to record songs off the radio all the time. Now XM is in trouble for simply providing a device capable of it. What changed? Personally, I buy music if I think it's good enough to buy, which is actually quite often. I like owning the physical cd, and I don't like getting music that is DRM protected because I don't like the lack of trust I'm being given. So if I buy music online it's from emusic.com. Just last week a friend of mine copied an album for me- it's awesome, I decided after listening to two songs I wanted to buy it- but it's not available on emusic, so I've been spending the week trying to physically find it so I can give the artist and record label money for it. The only reason they don't have my money yet is because they refuse to make it available in a reasonable format online. Who's fault is the lack of this sale? You know what happened when software companies started acting like this? Open source software started showing up. . .

Hardly new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939250)

Back in the 80s when I was a teen no-one thought twice about copying tapes, and I'm pretty sure most didn't realise it was a crime.

They know they just dont care (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939252)

I think it is fairly obvious, people of all ages know it is illegal. People of all ages just dont care. they buy some they "steal" some, they dont care if it is "illegal" because they dont see it as immoral.

the RIAA is too busy trying to get everyone to buy everything all the time, which will absolutely never happen.

and no it isnt like shoplifting sometimes so dont bother with that one...

What happened to the good old days... (1)

dorianh49 (988940) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939261)

... of stickers that read "Skateboarding in not a crime". Now, everything is all "geektafied" which, for us twenty-somethings that got beat up by skateboarders in school when bleeding-edge was a 486-DX2 50MHz (and if you overclocked the FSB from 25MHz to 33MHz, you REALLY are geeky), is quite a paradox. And I don't mean a pair o' Doc Martins (steeltoe, remember? Ouch.).

...and they are right. (1)

theheff (894014) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939264)

Copying a CD isn't a crime. Copying copyrighted material is. Every CD out there, music or software, isn't necessarily illegal to copy.

Great to see everything is a bigger threat than... (1)

kinglink (195330) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939265)

First it was audio tapes was going to make it easy to pirate music, it's a terror.

Then there's giving a friend a tape and dubbing it. It's far worse than copying off the radio.

Then it's was online downloads are going to kill the industry. It's far more damaging than people trading songs

Then it was peer to peer, it's killing in the industry. It's easily worse than direct downloads.

Now it's trading cds it's far worse than peer to peer.

Flavor of the month? I'm not talking about the song. Do they even notice that they don't think it's right to pirate if the guy before them pirated? That says the know right from wrong. The fact is the huge price for a single CD is probably what's making them believe piracy is legit. A school kid paying 20 bucks is insanely high. It's akin to an adult paying around 1000 dollars for an item.

Maybe the Riaa needs to remember they used to get a lot of attention for their artists off of tape swapping, perhaps it's time to do it again, and not kill the practice at the same time killing their positive image.

Teens can't figure out that CD copying is illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939278)

... because, nowadays, most of the popular music that caters to their tastes causes brain damage!

It's a vicious circle. Here's how it works:

  1. recording companies hire dumb peformers (erroneously named "artists" by their companies);
  2. dumb performers are overexposed by mass media;
  3. lyric writers and composers create a dumb-song-that-sticks-to-the-ear for that performer;
  4. the song is exhaustingly played in radios/tv programmes/events for a short period of time;
  5. (first signs of brain damage) teenagers buy a CD containing the song and 12 other album-fillers that nobody wants to listen;
  6. teenagers listen to the CD with their friends, propagating the brain damage to previously non-exposed individuals;
  7. due to the impairment of brain functions that stop people from doing stupid things, individuals make non-authorized copies of the CD (which, under normal conditions, nobody would care to listen);
  8. the song is soon forgotten, newer performers are hired and newer songs are made, which takes us back to (1);
  9. profit!

It is a crime (1)

Reemi (142518) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939283)


Definately, it is a crime to charge me 1 Euro for every blank CD/DVD I buy for my own video productions.

I've paid for multiple music albums already, but where can I get them?

Hello idiots, copying a CD is NOT a crime (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15939284)

Unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted material for personal use may be a civil violation, but it is NOT a crime, and never has been. If teens don't think copying CDs is a crime, good!

You notice that all these RIAA filing sharing suits are SUITS, not indictments? What does that tell you?

Copying is a crime if it's done commercially. I think it might also be a crime if the material is hosted on a computer for sharing, but prosecutions for that are very very rare.

The entire idea of criminal copyright infringement is a fairly new concept. Copyright violation is a civil matter unless it is done on a commercial scale.

Violations of civil laws are not crimes.

I don't know why this concept is so difficult to grasp by slashdotters, because clearly teens have figured it out.

The obvious step (1)

someone1234 (830754) | more than 7 years ago | (#15939292)

If the schoolyard piracy is even more threatening than P&P piracy, then: Close the Schools!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...