Copying CDs might be a legal right?

[troysvihl]

Seems that record companies get a slice of the blank-media market in exchange for the limited reproduction rights held by consumers under the Home Recording Act.

I found it amusing:


http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/ne...kpt=zdhpnews01

[glc]

Right - copying a cd is legal for personal use, not your friend's or neighbor's use.

[highrisemech]

I don't think there is much anybody will be able to do to stop duplication.
I mean get real there are those trying to duplicate people and animals now......

[freptide]

RIAA<

[Gabe]

I was reading an article in Target PC the other day about how Universal is now trying to make sure their cd's cannot be ripped (maybe burned too???)


"Earlier this month, Universal Music introduced copy protection for its line of audio CDs using Midbar Tech's Cactus Data Shield (CDS). The first disc released with Midbar's protection was "More Fast and Furious: Music From and Inspired by the Motion Picture 'The Fast and the Furious.'" According to stories posted online, Universal plans to copy protect its entire lineup of CDs. The announcement that Universal will copy protect its CDs -- ostensibly to prevent users from ripping MP3s for trade online -- came the day before the launch of pressplay, Universal's (and Sony's) subscription outlet for digital audio."

Target PC got it from techtv I think.

if you think about it, this is pretty funny. It's even funnier when you know that it was tested (by techtv I think) and for the most part it does not work. Good job Universal

[troysvihl]

Right - copying a cd is legal for personal use, not your friend's or neighbor's use.

Yeah, glc. But the article goes one step further. The record company's attempts at stopping duplication may acctually be a violation of consumer's rights.

[Paul Victorey]

Originally posted by troysvihl Yeah, glc. But the article goes one step further. The record company's attempts at stopping duplication may acctually be a violation of consumer's rights.

Well, I think the existing laws mean that, if you make a copy of something you own, you can't be held liable for copyright violation. I don't think that means that companies have to make duplication easy, just that they can't press charges if you do copy it.

And honestly, I trust the ingenuity of people to overcome any anti-copying scheme. Truly, as long as the information is there (and it has to be, as they need to make the CD listenable), people will overcome any attempts to prevent them from copying it.

Of course, this new copy protection is interesting, because the way it works is by injecting ERRORS into the audio streams -- they make CDs which are non-compliant to standards, and they trust the error correction of CD players to reconstruct the song. And, some insiders claim, the labels fully expect 5-10% of all CD players will not be able to play the media.

Apparently, record labels think that selling useless CDs to 5-10% of their marker is A-OK...

Of course, the labels are just plain dumb. Copying will never be stopped, or even slowed, by anything they can do. They just piss off consumers, and gain nothing in the process.

[highrisemech]

To tell you the truth it is impossible to copy protect anything audible or visual. It is way to easy to defeat any type of protection.I can think of a few ways right off the top of my head. The whole distribution mediem would have to be modified and even then it would be difficult. This is a losing battle and I think the makers of these cd's should come to thier sences and realize it. Just charge the price for the initial sale with that consideration in mind. The fact is the world has changed and we change with it. The entertainment industry is no exception like it or not. Wake up to the realization like the rest of us have. Me, I don't condone the pirating of intellectual property and don't like it any more than anyone else. But the fact of life is that if you put your property out into the public it has entered no mans land, therefor if you value it that much you gotta do what I do. Don't put it out because if you do some character is surely going to steal it weather we like it or not legal or not. This has been a problem since the dawn of society. It is like the guy who invented the wheel we all use his invention but do we pay him royalties for it no. Why? Because the wheel is common knowledge and so is duplication.
Sorry if you want to buck the trend that has been developed over thousands of years but crying over spilled milk is not going to help. My friends computer is better than mine so I'm going to copy his design.

[RayH]

The way the music industry would have you believe any copying of music is illegal and driving them to the poor house. Copying music for personal use is legal. Every bit as much as I can tape their music. I can turn them in to CDs also, so long as money is not changing hands.

The copy protection schemes are going to fail, not because "there will always be ways to copy," but because the public will not put up for it. The public will not put up for purchasing CDs that can only be played on a home stereo and not the computer nor in a car. The copy protection is going to be that serious.

People are not going to purchase the product that is going to tell them what and how they are going to use it. People want it portable. Quite frankly, the recording industry may have to come to grip that their products may not be as valuble as previously.

Instead of a few people making all the money. It may now be that the smaller artist can get his due. My father was a variety artist (not a musician or comedian)whose career came to a screetching halt when TVs became the norm in households. People didn't go out to see live entertainment as much. When's the last time you went to a nightclub to see something other than a musician or comedian?

[highrisemech]

Exactly a live performance can't be duplicated.
Furthermore I think it will come to the point where a recording artist will have to auction off thier work to the highest bidder, because like I say once this materialis out there it is subject to duplication. Therefore the artist will have to make thier money from the initial sale before this material is subject to duplication. I think the artists themselves will do well. It is the recording companies the so called record labels that will and are suffering from this. Let's face it if you have something good that people want they will buy it. The idea is to get it sold before it is subject to duplication.

[Toaster]

Howdy folks,
The following applies to US citizens. Other countries *may* have similar laws.

USA citizens are granted a "right" to make archival back-ups of copyrighted material. This right is payed for when you purchase any recordable medium.
This "right" means that you and only you may retain a copy for YOUR USE ONLY.
This right mandates that you destroy any copies when the original is no longer LEGALLY owned by you.
When you cannot meet the licensing of the original medium, all copies are to either be transferred to the new owner or destroyed.
This supercedes any licensing made by the original vendors.

Under this right, you may NOT:
1. Distribute the copies to those who did not originally purchase the original medium.
2. Rent, lend, borrow.
3. Allow others to (2).


To use this right and to conform to the given right you must:
1. Destroy any copies when transferring the original medium and licensing material(s) including activation, keys and documentation.
2. Notify the new owner that no other copies exist or that all archival copies were transferred to the new owner.

It IS ILLEGAL to:
1. Retain a copy of the materials when the original is not in the immediate possession of the owner.
2. Use, retain, allow to be used medium if it does not meet (1) above.

There is a bit more to this and maybe "lawyer ron" would enlighten us.

[archie]

I believe those same rules apply to that beautiful country just north of the USA.

[Toaster]

Howdy Arch,
I'm sure that wonderful country and great neighbor "Canada" would be the same.
Of course, I can't speak of fact regarding this thus I omitted that statement.
Of course, folks are encouraged to determine if these laws apply to you and your country.
Also, "recorded" medium includes:
"Off air" meaning radio/television video and audio.
So long as it is for "private use".

This means that you have a right to record, off air, any program material you see fit. You may "not" sell such recordings without prior consent of the author(s).
So you can't sell a "tape" or "disk" or other recorded medium to someone for gratis. (there seems to be some problems dealing with radio/TV recorded issues however dealing with trading, borrowing and the like)