| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/01/2008 09:35:24 AM · #1 |
to your hard drive for your own personal use?
Well if so according to this lawyer you can be sued:
FoxNews
I think the music industry is really going out on a limb here. Although it is highly unlikely that they will come after you for this it is nice to know I can be sued for taking a CD I purchased and then placing the music in MP3 format on my hard drive, then moving it to my mp3 player.
|
|
|
|
01/01/2008 10:11:39 AM · #2 |
The music industry is after the wrong people, sorta.
There are discussions in some pro forums about photogs using © music on their websites, w/o permission.
I know several DJs that will rip or copy the bride's 'wedding songs' to a disk and give it to her.
I know many videographers that add © music to the wedding videos.
These folks that are creating works they don't want copied, so why would they then copy other artists work? And they're doing it for profit, do doubly bad IMO.
------------
as to your quote - back in the 70s friends and I 'dubbed' (the term then) LPs to 8 track then cassette for our cars. We never bought the same album twice to play in two places.
Most computer software is this way too - you need a copy for every computer. The program I use for projection sales isn't that way - they will let you install it several times, but only run one at a time (honor system I suppose). Works well in my case, but I suppose it can be abused easily.
The music industry is still trying to re-do their business model. The latest Eagles album was release by the band and is sold at walmart, no record company is involved. Small bands go directly to the web, again, no record company involved. So yeah, the record companies are getting it on both ends, artists and consumers, so they're like a cornered animal - mean, nasty and irrational.
Message edited by author 2008-01-01 10:15:37.
|
|
|
|
01/01/2008 10:17:45 AM · #3 |
| Hmmm.... I buy CDs so I can rip them to my computer. If the music industry would prefer, I'll skip the buying the CD part and just download the mp3's. They really need to rethink that strategy.... |
|
|
|
01/01/2008 10:43:09 AM · #4 |
Doesn't everyone buy used CDs off ebay, rip 'em, resell 'em, right?
The issue might be folks like a friend of mine's GF. She will borrow music from anywhere - library, friends, etc and rip it (to audio CD). He got her a new MP3 player for christmas as she has overflowed her last one with music...he borrowed her 'country collection' (she has one for rock, jazz, hip hop, etc as well). A tad over 400 CDs.
Now if she had to buy them all, she couldn't afford it. So did the music industry really lose any money?
I've seen ads for some site or another that charges monthly fee. $10 a month or so and you can have any all songs out there, as long as you pay $10/month they keep playing. Cable TV, internet, Cell phones - all more or less work on the same theory, a monthly fee, and some video stores work on something similar.
Message edited by author 2008-01-01 10:48:14.
|
|
|
|
01/01/2008 10:53:33 AM · #5 |
I do... to listen in my mp3 player... and sort the songs the way I like... easiest way is ripping :P
Sue me! |
|
|
|
01/01/2008 12:00:22 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
The music industry is still trying to re-do their business model. The latest Eagles album was release by the band and is sold at walmart, no record company is involved. Small bands go directly to the web, again, no record company involved. So yeah, the record companies are getting it on both ends, artists and consumers, so they're like a cornered animal - mean, nasty and irrational. |
Gee.....what a shame! After they treated so many people so badly because they used to be the only venue to the public.
They were greedy, souless bastards for all too long.
'Bout time it caught up with them!
|
|
|
|
01/01/2008 10:16:33 PM · #7 |
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. think about it,first i would buy the album/record for home listening,then i would need an 8 track copy for my car,then cassete tapes took over the car scene had to buy the cassete,then came cd's,ofcourse ALL of my downloads are for my personal use,the record companies deserve the grief thats befallen thier biz,they forever ripped off the artist's as NikonJeb stated...
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 12:02:21 AM · #8 |
Some artists realize that they make so little money from sales of actual CD's that they have foregone the effort of doing so. Look at Radiohead's new album, or Prince.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 12:07:05 AM · #9 |
Anyone can sue anyone for anything.. I can sue you because I don't like the color of your shirt.
It doesn't mean the claim will stand up in court...
~Terry
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 12:18:22 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 02:40:33 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by geoffb:
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
How much of that $12.99 or however much you paid actually make it back to the artist? Ever work that out? Pennies per CD, if that. The money is in merchandise and touring.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 07:37:17 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Anyone can sue anyone for anything.. I can sue you because I don't like the color of your shirt.
It doesn't mean the claim will stand up in court...
~Terry |
Yeh, but... can you afford a 5 digit legal cost or will you settle for $2k out of court?
-N.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 08:27:52 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by nikolaos:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Anyone can sue anyone for anything.. I can sue you because I don't like the color of your shirt.
It doesn't mean the claim will stand up in court...
~Terry |
Yeh, but... can you afford a 5 digit legal cost or will you settle for $2k out of court?
-N. |
This is exactly the type of "Pro Bono" case that some lawyer just might want to tackle.
Similarly, one must also consider the possibility that the courts could see this legal undertaking as being "Frivolous" and render a "With Prejudice" decision, wherein all of he legal fees incurred would be visited upon the plaintiff.
Ray |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 09:38:47 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
This is exactly the type of "Pro Bono" case that some lawyer just might want to tackle.
Similarly, one must also consider the possibility that the courts could see this legal undertaking as being "Frivolous" and render a "With Prejudice" decision, wherein all of he legal fees incurred would be visited upon the plaintiff.
Ray |
But the point of all this is that it never gets to court. If it gets, they're prety sure that they have enough evidence or else they drop the case . I don't think many people will risk paying $200k for 24 songs they downloaded.
This is all about spreading fear so that an ancient business model can continue to survive. They can't know you're ripping a cd that unless they monitor you... but they can scare you enough so you can drop $1 more to iTunes. Etherway..most of CD's these days are locked so ripping them could possibly violate dmca also :P
-N.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 10:25:33 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by nikolaos:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
This is exactly the type of "Pro Bono" case that some lawyer just might want to tackle.
Similarly, one must also consider the possibility that the courts could see this legal undertaking as being "Frivolous" and render a "With Prejudice" decision, wherein all of he legal fees incurred would be visited upon the plaintiff.
Ray |
But the point of all this is that it never gets to court. If it gets, they're prety sure that they have enough evidence or else they drop the case . I don't think many people will risk paying $200k for 24 songs they downloaded.
This is all about spreading fear so that an ancient business model can continue to survive. They can't know you're ripping a cd that unless they monitor you... but they can scare you enough so you can drop $1 more to iTunes. Etherway..most of CD's these days are locked so ripping them could possibly violate dmca also :P
-N. |
I will grant you your point, but that does not necessarily mean that the courts will always rule in favour of big business. This exampleis one where the plaintiffs are seemingly the clear losers, and perhaps one on which the "Little People" can hang their hats.
Ray |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 11:15:28 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I will grant you your point, but that does not necessarily mean that the courts will always rule in favour of big business. This exampleis one where the plaintiffs are seemingly the clear losers, and perhaps one on which the "Little People" can hang their hats.
Ray |
I'm not saying that courts are one sided .. I'm just saying that you'll need a lot of time, money and sanity to prove you're right in these cases and it's more easy for most people to agree in out of court settlements of a few thousand dollars instead. It's not like you're accused of stealing a CD from a store and you can prove you were somewhere else at that time.. there's like a 10 stop gray line between an ip address that connects to you and you committing a crime. And even if you go to court and you're right there's still the chance that you'll have to pay your lawyers fee and it would not be small.
Anyway, I prefer to pay a ticked and see bands live or buy a cd directly from them then to give 20 euro ($28?) to but a cd that may or may not play on my cd player.. and even if it plays I may or may not get sued for listening to it.
-N.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 11:33:22 AM · #17 |
| The only reason I buy a CD is if it's of something I can't download from iTunes, and then I rip it and basically trash it. They take up space and are useless for me. Trying to outlaw ripping is stupid, because that just means I'll never buy another CD. If I buy the music, my opinion - and that of the law, regardless of what the RIAA CLAIMS - is that I can make as many personal copies as are required for me to use the music. Distribution via the web is not a personal copy. Providing it to another individual is not personal use. Putting it behind a video is not personal use. But ripping it for my own use via MP3 is clearly personal use. iTunes expressly allows the reverse - making up to 5 CDs of even protected files. |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 11:34:29 AM · #18 |
People still buy CD's? :)
Message edited by author 2008-01-02 11:34:46.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 12:43:06 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by geoffb:
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
If I bought A Ted Nugent album in 1978, then a cassette of it in 1988 and then a CD of the SAME album in 1998 I've paid three times - for the same music. Yes, I paid for the change in media, and that is fair I suppose. But the artist didn't do any more work and most likely got paid 3 royalties, but I can't listen to the song three times as much or often or whatnot. Now the recording industry would like me to pay again to get it in MP3 format.
Used to be you might listen at home and in the car. A record and a cassette (and how many people dubbed their records to cassettes for their cars?????? A hell of a lot. And I think RIAA got a cut of every blank tape if memory serves). Now you have a copy of a song on your computer, perhaps on a CD for backup, on an iPod (or more than one??) and if you have a new car, in there too on it's HD. The RIAA would like you to pay for every copy you have. It's somewhat understandable, but in this day and age it's not realistic.
Computer software folks have been fighting this for 25 or 30 years and still don't have an ironclad solution to it.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 01:25:08 PM · #20 |
This is ridiculous, I don't like buying from download applications anyway. The reason for this is that you can get much higher qualtiy MP3s from ripping them from CDs yourself. I'd like to pick and choose what I get. That and a lot of times you can find great deals on CDs for cheap, much cheaper than the $0.99 per song that a lot of these places charge. They are starting to go WAY too far with this now and I frankly don't even care if Britney Spears or some producer can't buy another Ferrari this year...I mean, it is all about the music to them right?
Message edited by author 2008-01-02 13:31:48.
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 06:20:24 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by geoffb:
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
If I bought A Ted Nugent album in 1978, then a cassette of it in 1988 and then a CD of the SAME album in 1998 I've paid three times - for the same music. Yes, I paid for the change in media, and that is fair I suppose. But the artist didn't do any more work and most likely got paid 3 royalties, but I can't listen to the song three times as much or often or whatnot. Now the recording industry would like me to pay again to get it in MP3 format.
Used to be you might listen at home and in the car. A record and a cassette (and how many people dubbed their records to cassettes for their cars?????? A hell of a lot. And I think RIAA got a cut of every blank tape if memory serves). Now you have a copy of a song on your computer, perhaps on a CD for backup, on an iPod (or more than one??) and if you have a new car, in there too on it's HD. The RIAA would like you to pay for every copy you have. It's somewhat understandable, but in this day and age it's not realistic.
Computer software folks have been fighting this for 25 or 30 years and still don't have an ironclad solution to it. |
The point i was trying to convey exactly,ty...its not like i get top quality mp3's from bearshare,its a total crapshoot not to mention the threat of viruses,no different than when i used to record off of the radio then copied it hi-fi then sent it to my friend in another region,no-one cared then why should they care now?
|
|
|
|
01/02/2008 08:10:53 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by geoffb:
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
How much of that $12.99 or however much you paid actually make it back to the artist? Ever work that out? Pennies per CD, if that. The money is in merchandise and touring. |
So what you're saying is that you justify stealing the music by the fact that you're only stealing pennies?
Even if that is the case (that artists only get 1% of album costs), it gets compounded when you download hundreds of songs and when there are millions of people doing it. |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 08:14:14 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by geoffb:
Originally posted by jonnienye:
i personally havent bought a cd since 2000,i download mp3's all the time(Bearshare) and dont feel bad at all,most of the music i download has already been paid for by me many times over back when i was younger. |
How does the money you paid for an album 15 years ago support an artist that's putting out albums right now? |
If I bought A Ted Nugent album in 1978, then a cassette of it in 1988 and then a CD of the SAME album in 1998 I've paid three times - for the same music. Yes, I paid for the change in media, and that is fair I suppose. But the artist didn't do any more work and most likely got paid 3 royalties, but I can't listen to the song three times as much or often or whatnot. Now the recording industry would like me to pay again to get it in MP3 format. |
Oh, so you're only talking about downloading albums that you've already bought in the past? What about the other 99% of downloads--of albums being downloaded for the first time?
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
The RIAA would like you to pay for every copy you have. It's somewhat understandable, but in this day and age it's not realistic. |
I'm not against ripping songs off of CDs. I was only emphasizing that jonnienye is probably not downloading solely albums he bought in the past, and would otherwise have to "buy again". |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 08:15:33 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by SamDoe1:
This is ridiculous, I don't like buying from download applications anyway. The reason for this is that you can get much higher qualtiy MP3s from ripping them from CDs yourself. I'd like to pick and choose what I get. That and a lot of times you can find great deals on CDs for cheap, much cheaper than the $0.99 per song that a lot of these places charge. They are starting to go WAY too far with this now and I frankly don't even care if Britney Spears or some producer can't buy another Ferrari this year...I mean, it is all about the music to them right? |
I agree with you, although it's much cheaper if you're not buying the whole album, and are simply buying 1 or 2 songs you like on the album. In that case, it's much cheaper to spend $2 and not buy the songs you wouldn't listen to anyway. |
|
|
|
01/02/2008 08:19:02 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by jonnienye:
its not like i get top quality mp3's from bearshare,its a total crapshoot not to mention the threat of viruses |
So a threat of getting a virus is somehow "payment" enough? That's like justifying robbing a liquor store because the cashier might knock you in the head with a bat.
Originally posted by jonnienye:
no-one cared then why should they care now? |
The whole point of this thread is that someone does care that you're doing it. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 07:02:09 AM EDT.
