Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:52 pm

If this comes to be, I can see skyrocketing piracy. I for one will refuse to pay 2x for the same song/album. They're digging a hole for themselves.

Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:07 pm

...then wouldn't that make distribution of iTunes a violation of the DMCA by Apple?

I mean, it's software that enables such "theft"

Hmmmm

Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:40 pm

OK, when are we going to see the following:

"The movie companies, my clients, have said, for some time now, and it's been on their website for some time now, that it's perfectly lawful to take a DVD that you've purchased, upload it onto your computer, put it onto your iPod."

Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:04 pm

This is just laughable. Should the head of the RIAA get sideswiped by a dumptruck tomorrow, it would be a good day indeed.

Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:53 pm

Whatever RIAA! You just try nd stop me from ripping my cd's into my iPod. a**holes.

Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:35 am

I can just see the RIAA brainstorming session now:

"Alright people. Piracy is out of control, nobody respects us or our music. Profits are falling. How can we bring customers back into the fold?"

"What if we sued children so that they are in debt for the rest of their lives and will never ever amount to anything?"

"Good, I like that. Make an exampel of them."

"Oh, and let's charge people twice for the music. If they liked it enough to buy it once, they will probably be overjoyed to buy it a second time."

"People will love us!"

Hey, on the plus side, you are allowed to burn iTunes songs onto an unlimited number of CDs. Buy the album on iTunes, burn it on to as many CDs as you need.

But, I think the first commentor summed it up best when he said, "unfuckingbelievable."

Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:02 am

One day they will take this too far and there will have to be a public outcry. Mark my words, One day we just might find ourselfs marching on washington becuase of this copyright crap.

Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:49 am

Copyrights aren't crap. Artists have as much of a right to make a living off their material as anyone else. I think it's completely wrong to take music without paying for it, but I DO believe that once you've paid for it, you have the right to listen to it any way you want: in your car, on your stereo, or even with your head up your ass.

But there's no denying that the RIAA are a bunch of greedy bastards. They obviously don't have a clue how to deal with the whole digital music revolution/evolution; it just seems like they're grasping at straws for how to maintain a profit margin in the new medium.

Fri Feb 17, 2006 5:52 am

Bosco wrote:

Wow. Do any of you understand the legal concept of "fair use"? "Fair use" is a defense against a copyright violation complaint. not some kind of "right". If you read really carefully, you'll see that the RIAA is saying that they grant blanket privilege for people to copy disks onto their iPods, but just because they grant that privilege with current content and formats doesn't mean that they automatically grant similar privileges with all future formats and content. That basically what "all rights reserved" means. Put another way... Copying to your hard drive or iPod is not "fair use" because you don't need it to be. You already have been granted that privilege under license. Or another way... We don't have to decide which 12 of us get to be in the life raft and which 12 will have to take our chances with the sharks BECAUSE THE BOAT IS NOT SINKING. Unbefreakinlievable is right. I guess it's EFF pledge drive week.

Ok, so are you saying that the article is wrong, and that you WON'T have to buy your music twice (if they have their way)? Or are you saying that it's ok to pay for your music twice? What you've said does not jive with what the article said. WHAT ARE YOU SAYING?

Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:49 am

	LaurieF wrote:
	You silly, silly little boy. Stupidest thing said whole thread. You know nothing about the RIAxx, or copyright, and what you say is just verbal diarrhoea. Now contribute to the debate, or leave.

Sorry, but YOU don't know $#!% about copyright law, I am sorry. The moment you say RIAA is correct is the moment when you prove you have no clue about the issue. Fair use is not about licensing, it's an overarching statutory right granted on the grounds of a legitimate application of the license you get in the first place.

It's OBVIOUS that if you get a song, you ARE (or, in stupid U.S., SHOULD) entitled to use it in whatever personal device you feel like using. The content is independent from the media; so as long as you don't spread it to anyone else (although in Germany and other countries you CAN do that, to close relatives and friends) you are fine. Written law means NOTHING if it's not followed by legitimacy; what the RIAA says is simply absurd and should be countered by all means.

Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:31 pm

When is the RIAA going to realize that it's consumers that drive technology. Record companies don't need to control it, they need to harness it. We as consumers have created the system out of demand. We've done all the work! When I bought cd's, i made mixtapes and I gave them to everybody. That has not changed. All they should be concerned with is initial point of sale revenue, how to make their money off the top. Keep it simple, people are going to copy it to their iPods, cellphones, laptops, it doesn't matter! This will never ever change. Apple understands consumers and no one else had the guts to believe things could work differently. Now everyone's looking to them to raise prices, blah blah blah.. All is see is record companies built on lazy fat cats and outdated business plans, that have failed to adapt, and are reduced to threats through a bullshit assocation that no one cares about.

Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:27 pm

Straight from the RIAA website on "Ask the RIAA":

--------

What is your stand on MP3?

This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That's not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail. But the fact that technology exists to enable unlimited Internet distribution of music copies doesn't make it right.

--------

Sure looks like their own website argues against this article. It says very clearly that "If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great." ... iPod = Portable Music Player, therefore iPod = okay to put my music on. The RIAA is a bunch of idiots that has no idea what they stand for apparently.

I can guarantee that if they start saying I can't do what I choose with what I've bought and own so that I can listen to those artists how I like, I'll say screw them and stop buying any commercial music ... already the majority of the music I've purchased in the past year has been independent artists that I've heard on podcasts. The interest is created by the podcast, and I buy the CD direct from the artist. The crap the RIAA is doing is only pushing me and others like me further and further from the artists they claim to protect. I wonder if the artists realize this.

- ross in indianapolis

Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:35 pm

Ohcrap! Does this mean that I will be sued if I get a tune in my head?

Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:08 pm

john hewitt sucks donkey dick.. much like the RIAA

Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:11 pm

Guest wrote:

Straight from the RIAA website on "Ask the RIAA": -------- What is your stand on MP3? This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That's not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail. But the fact that technology exists to enable unlimited Internet distribution of music copies doesn't make it right. -------- Sure looks like their own website argues against this article. It says very clearly that "If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great." ... iPod = Portable Music Player, therefore iPod = okay to put my music on. The RIAA is a bunch of idiots that has no idea what they stand for apparently. I can guarantee that if they start saying I can't do what I choose with what I've bought and own so that I can listen to those artists how I like, I'll say screw them and stop buying any commercial music ... already the majority of the music I've purchased in the past year has been independent artists that I've heard on podcasts. The interest is created by the podcast, and I buy the CD direct from the artist. The crap the RIAA is doing is only pushing me and others like me further and further from the artists they claim to protect. I wonder if the artists realize this. - ross in indianapolis

Good post, if thats the case.. worry ye' not.

Keep putting songs on the iPod until the FBI show up, thats my plan

Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:23 pm

Most artists/labels the RIAA represents now are not worth purchasing ONCE, much less twice.

Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:01 pm

Sadly, the record labels & RIAA really ARE incredibly short-sighted, highly stupid and if not evil, certainly doing a rather good imitation.

Does anyone remember the anti-copy 'notch' they wanted to put into music at around 4 KHz? Totally audible, vastly degraded music quality, but they thought it was a good idea because they thought they stood to make a few more bucks by using it (which is laughable, since lots of customers would've stopped buying the now-totally-hosed music). Thank god it got shouted down. If it weren't so tragic, it'd be almost funny how short-sighted the record companies are:

Quote:

Remember, these were the same guys that wanted to notch out part of the music on CDs so that new cassette recorders with notch detectors could not copy them. They said the notch filters didn't touch the music and nobody could hear the difference. Recording artists yelled at the record companies and The National Bureau of Standards said that it altered the music so much that "Anybody could hear the difference". The record companies gave up.

http://www.rogernichols.com/EQ/EQ_91-06.html