RIAA finally went to far.

[carpenter]

RIAA suing citizen for copying legally purchased CDs to PC

What's next ?

[Face]

Did you read the entire page?

[dohcmark8]

Nope. The original article was misinterpreted by many.

The RIAA sued him because he put his MP3s in a shared folder, not because he ripped fair-use MP3 copies of CDs that he owns.

[carpenter]

I did actually, the 2 follow ups interesting
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/30/r...erks-about-it/

. As we're all unfortunately aware, that's pretty standard stuff; the big change from previous downloading cases is the RIAA's newfound aggressiveness in calling MP3s ripped from legally owned CDs "unauthorized copies"

and
http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/04/s...s-is-stealing/

Sony BMG's head lawyer says ripping CDs is "stealing"

Posted Oct 4th 2007 9:01AM by Nilay Patel
Filed under: Portable Audio
There's one of them RIAA lawsuits going down in Duluth this week, and Jammie Thomas, the single mother charged with sharing 26 songs on Kazaa, isn't going down without a fight. Yesterday her attorneys called Jennifer Pariser, Sony BMG's head of litigation, to testify before the jury and got her to say some incredibly incendiary things -- not least of which was her opinion that making copies of purchased music is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy.'" That viewpoint, of course, implicates pretty much every single thing consumers do with music and computers, including transferring songs to iPods and Zunes ....

[BaggedLancer]

I swear bad press like this just makes people want to download more.

For them to say that it could potentially be illegal for me to transfer my CD to my iPod is absolutely insane.

[Sami]

I swear bad press like this just makes people want to download more.

For them to say that it could potentially be illegal for me to transfer my CD to my iPod is absolutely insane.

It's illegal for you to rip your DVD and transfer it to your video iPod, isn't it? I do agree that this whole copyright issue is ridiculous but then again, the music companies are battling a fight they can't win so they are trying all they can.

[shadowofnight]

Screw em...download away...Metallica ( Lars inparticular ) pissed and moaned and made me download even more then I could ever use/listen to. Anything I have ever downloaded AND thought was worth listening to...I bought the licensed CD for. I basically consider downloading " Try before you buy "

[jakelm]

For them to say that it could potentially be illegal for me to transfer my CD to my iPod is absolutely insane.

I would be in a **** load of trouble, almost all my cd's are on the iPod....oh ****

I didnt think that was illegal....

[shack]

I would be in a **** load of trouble, almost all my cd's are on the iPod....oh ****

I didnt think that was illegal....

It's not....that is just the interpretation the RIAA wants. Case law goes back to the days of making cassette copies of LPs and VHS copies for "personal use". They are pissing in the wind on this one.

[obieone]

If that's illegal, then Steve Jobs better be breaking out his checkbook-he's got A LOT of IPODS he's gonna be EATING!!!

[hearingimpared]

Yep they are pissing in the wind!!!

When I buy and LP or CD, I am buying the music on it, not the effing medium (although I am sure that is included in the price). If I choose to move the music to a different medium FOR MYSELF! I am entitled to do so because I own it, I didn't lease it or rent it or borrow it, I bought it.

[jephdood]

:p

[hearingimpared]

Whoa!

[SKsolutions]

Digital is a bit different than analog, but enough is enough.

[dkg999]

That new argument/comments seems to start them on a really slippery slope that is going to be hard to get traction on. The first question is why did they allow the practice (or ignore it) until now. Yes digital is different than analog from a technology standpoint, but the intent of the action is the same. Then they have to deal with all the implications, the first which comes to mind is a radio station ripping the songs to a music server to pre-program a playlist or the hands-off overnight programming.

Beyond that, I would like to see the business case that says the music industry makes more money if it prevents ripping music to another medium for personal use (ie not for distribution). I don't think this is supported by any positive financial metrics.

[MacLeod]

I wish the RIAA would burn in hell.

If they were paupers and barely struggling to get by or taking losses like GM or Ford, then I wouldnt have much trouble blaming them. But when youve got an industry that is literally ****ting money, I mean more than they can spend, and growing by leaps and bounds I have absolutely no understanding of why they would spend time doing this.

Its like youve got some big fat rich dude with his arms full of millions of dollars in cash and he's bitching about the few pennies and nickels that are falling thru his grip onto the ground. F them!

I can honestly say that out of all the music Ive downloaded for free, 90% of it has led to me purchasing something from that artist that I probably wouldnt have ever bought had it not been for the free download.

But now that Itunes is out and you can get pretty much anything for $.99 a song or $9 a CD, I find it hard to use free download sites and take the risk. Plus I dont mind paying for music now that its a reasonable price. The greed of the RIAA making us pay $20+ for a F'ing cd is what has driven so many to free downloads.

[DarqueKnight]

Yep they are pissing in the wind!!!

When I buy and LP or CD, I am buying the music on it, not the effing medium (although I am sure that is included in the price). If I choose to move the music to a different medium FOR MYSELF! I am entitled to do so because I own it, I didn't lease it or rent it or borrow it, I bought it.

It's the other way around. You buy the physical medium and own it outright. The content on the medium is "licensed" for limited use by the consumer. Content ownership is retained by the copyright holder.

Posts #80, 84, and 89 of this thread discusses some details.

[DarqueKnight]

I wish the RIAA would burn in hell.

If they were paupers and barely struggling to get by or taking losses like GM or Ford, then I wouldnt have much trouble blaming them.

According to Rolling Stone magazine:

"Overall CD sales have plummeted sixteen percent for the year [2006] so far -- and that's after seven years of near-constant erosion. In the face of widespread piracy, consumers' growing preference for low-profit-margin digital singles over albums, and other woes, the record business has plunged into a historic decline."
Source: Rolling Stone Magazine -"The Record Industry's Decline".

But when youve got an industry that is literally ****ting money, I mean more than they can spend, and growing by leaps and bounds I have absolutely no understanding of why they would spend time doing this.

RIAA and NARIP (National Association of Recording Indistry Professionals) statistics do not support this. Do you have other, more credible recording industry sales statistics?

The sales statistics from the RIAA website for the years 1997 to 2006 provide some insight. The figures on the right hand side of the sheet show a declining trend in sales from 1999 onward.

The RIAA year end shipment statistics show no evidence of windfall profits. Certainly, some industry professionals are making lots of money, but overall, the industry is hurting financially. One thing people should remember is that, although the US recording industry is an 11 to 12 billion dollar a year business, net profits are relatively small. For every mega successful artist there are scores that didn't pan out for the record company.

[treitz3]

I would just like to throw out there that if the recording industries keep shelling out badly recorded music, they are part of the blame for loss of sales.

My point: If the recordings are so compressed and recorded so loud instead of recording them to sound good, what's the point in a purchase of a CD? One could just as easily go rip the damn thing and have the same sound. For those that are in the convenience crowd and not the people who buy music to actually "listen" and want a realistic and accurate reproduction of the music, that is.......

[bobman1235]

I, and probably most others here and elsewhere, have a big problem feeling bad for an industry in decline when said industry has done nothing to help themselves aside from ****ting on their customers. Rather than attack the actual root cause of their problems, and focus on adapting to a changing marketplace as well as improving their product, they continue to market boatloads of garbage, call their entire customer base criminals, and blame their woes on piracy. Rather than focus on innovation and expansion of their industry, they spend 90% of their time further alienating anyone and everyone by going on the offensive against the very people who they should be trying to endear themselves to.

The recording industry in general has a long history of being a cold ruthless money-making machine when it comes to their clients, all they've done is spread that attitude to their customers. They are not long for this world, and earned every bit of their failure.

[treitz3]

Well said Bobman1235.

[polksda]

I, and probably most others here and elsewhere, have a big problem feeling bad for an industry in decline when said industry has done nothing to help themselves aside from ****ting on their customers. Rather than attack the actual root cause of their problems, and focus on adapting to a changing marketplace as well as improving their product, they continue to market boatloads of garbage, call their entire customer base criminals, and blame their woes on piracy. Rather than focus on innovation and expansion of their industry, they spend 90% of their time further alienating anyone and everyone by going on the offensive against the very people who they should be trying to endear themselves to.

The recording industry in general has a long history of being a cold ruthless money-making machine when it comes to their clients, all they've done is spread that attitude to their customers. They are not long for this world, and earned every bit of their failure.

Couldn't say it any better. Well put!

[dorokusai]

Welcome to Capitalism.

[PolkThug]

According to Rolling Stone magazine:

"Overall CD sales have plummeted sixteen percent for the year [2006] so far ...

Don't forget iTunes hit its BILLIONTH download in February of '06.

[DarqueKnight]

I agree that the record companies have no one but themselves to blame for their current dire straits. The major record company CEO's really shot themselves in the head when they refused to cut deals with Napster and radically change their business model. They saw it as giving up to much control. Now, like the dinosaurs, the record companies are becoming extinct.

The traditional record company business model is obsolete anyway. No one really needs them anymore. An artist can purchase high quality studio recording gear very economically (especially if they buy used gear) and set up a home studio. CD's can be burned at home and sold on the Internet. If an artist does not have the expertise to make a recording and market and distribute it over the Internet, that expertise can be contracted out for very reasonable rates.

[cfrizz]

Well said Bob!

[xsmi]

My problem is not only with the terrible sound of recordings but also the sub-par artists. Although, there are many VERY talented musicians out there, why are we barraged with the same five our ten artist who sound alike anyway? Can't we get a genuinely new and innovative young artist who can inspire a new sound?

[Strong Bad]

I just read the short article on the Arizona guy being sued by the RIAA.

The article says he is being sued for making a copy of a CD he legally purchased, on to his home PC.

My question is this...

How do they know he copied this on to his home PC? If I take a CD and make a copy of it on to my home PC, how the F*** do they know I've done this? I don't follow this nonsense at all. Is there some type of tracking software they are putting on purchased CDs today that will contact them if it's been copied on to a PC?

This dude had to have been sharing the stuff which in turn...is illegal!

The RIAA can still burn in hell!

John

[shack]

The RIAA can still burn in hell!

Amen!

As I said, going back to the VHS and photo-copying days...case law is not in the favor of the RIAA. To date they have mainly picked on people who are file sharing and cannot afford to fight and cave in. It will be interesting if someone has the funds and the balls to take them on in a private use situation (ie: copying to a home computer or ipod for personal use). Even though it is the RIAA position that they own the right to tell how someone can use their product (buying and owning the medium - not the content) the courts have historically said otherwise when it comes to personal use.

[Strong Bad]

I don't own an Ipod and have little knowledge of all their workings.

If I copy a CD to an Ipod, don't share anything to anyone and just use it for my own listening enjoyment, how does the RIAA know I did this?

Same thing with a making a copy of a CD to use in your car/truck. I go home, copy a CD I just bought to listen to in my truck so the original doesn't get all scratched up. How do they know I made a copy and am listening to a copy in my truck?

These knuckleheads getting popped by the RIAA are sharing out their stuff even though they swear to the holy ghost they are not. Pretty simple if ya ask me.

Die RIAA!!!!