RIAA: Ripping purchased CDs is illegal!

[Destructor]

Yeah, you read that right. Via the Washington Post:

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings.

RIAA's hard-line position seems clear. Its Web site says: "If you make unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're stealing. You're breaking the law and you could be held legally liable for thousands of dollars in damages."

All I have to say is this - why the FUCK do we put up with the RIAA's utter bullshit? I don't buy CDs anymore (but there's also nothing but crap on the airwaves as it is nowadays), and I'd like to say it's in part to this absolute nonsense.

[Calvin]

I am sure eventually the big music publishers will realize that the RIAA is greatly contributing to killing their industry.

[Jiffy]

I am sure eventually the big music publishers will realize that the RIAA is greatly contributing to killing their industry.

I hope so, but it certainly is taking a looooooooong time.

[Wolves]

Hard line stances like this is only going to piss off legitimate buyers.....and might lead to a frame of logic as this....."Well....if legitimately buying a cd and putting in on my computer is illegal and I'm apparently breaking the law anyway...I might as well not even bother buying the cd and just illegally download the entire thing next time!"

[unbreakable]

I am sure eventually the big music publishers will realize that the RIAA is greatly contributing to killing their industry.

I hope so, but it certainly is taking a looooooooong time.

Hasn't one major studio actually broken away (and stopped giving money to) the RIAA?

Stuff like this really pisses me off as well, seeing as how the entire issue of "fair use" was settled back when cassette tapes were introduced onto the market.  It just mystifies me why all these settled issues have suddenly become "new" just because computers enter into it.  The underlying issue is the same, whether it's fair use, unsolicited communications (junk email was settled in cases regarding junk faxes), illegal wiretapping, etc etc.

When they call fair use stealing, they really detract from the wrongness of actual stealing.  IMO, what this tells a kid is that since they are going to say taking his own music and putting it on his PC is stealing... maybe he'll just figure he should simply skip the step of buying it in the first place.  Since either way he's a theif, he may as well be a thief who didn't waste his money on a coaster.

[Daehawk]

If I bought a cd id rip it if I wanted to. its mine by god. Then again I have'nt bought music in 21 years. You can download what you want free.

[Lee]

You can download what you want free.

Which is why the RIAA is there in the first place.

[Old Negus]

You can download what you want free.

Which is why the RIAA is there in the first place.

...which is why more people are downloading for free...

[ATB]

I buy CDs still.  I rip them all to my computer.

Come and get me RIAA.

[CeeKay]

You can download what you want free.

Which is why the RIAA is there in the first place.

...which is why more people are downloading for free...

it's a big circle jerk!

[Creepy_Smell]

[Blackadar]

Hard line stances like this is only going to piss off legitimate buyers.....and might lead to a frame of logic as this....."Well....if legitimately buying a cd and putting in on my computer is illegal and I'm apparently breaking the law anyway...I might as well not even bother buying the cd and just illegally download the entire thing next time!"

I've pretty much already reached that point.  I may have (*whistle*) copied music during the Napster phase, but I moved to downloading for a fee when that option became available.  Then they started more and more with the digital restrictions (DRM) and I can say I'm not buying CDs nor paying for any downloaded music anymore...of course, now that Amazon has DRM-free stuff, I'm reconsidering my alternatives.

[unbreakable]

The funny thing is, music piracy isn't even about digital.  If you want something, you can just copy the CD.  That's why the war on digital music is absurd.

This is all just a strategy lawyers call "peeling the onion".  They are trying to build up laws and precedents with the eventual goal of destroying "fair use", a concept they have never supported from day one.

[Zarkon]

Wait.  RIpping music from your CD to PC (or mp3 player) is illegal?

Um...fair use?  Or did the DMCA completely neuter that?

[Pi]

It's not even a fair use issue.  Copying music for personal use is explicitly allowed in the Copyright Act:

§ 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions

No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.

This was a part of a law which allowed royalty payments on digital audio media to be given to the music companies.  In return, people who made "mix tapes," etc. could not be considered infringers.  Furthermore, the law was written broadly in order to encompass future technologies, which should include computers.

[Caine]

i like how they are always looking for new ways to sue you.   ripping purchased songs = illegal copying?!  next they'll say that apple is breaking the law by selling drm-free music. 

hooray for riaa!  soon we'll all be able to pay for the "privilege" of listening to a cd at a friends house.    riaa please?

[Old Negus]

I just needed to post again and say how much I despise the RIAA. I couldn't get this story out of my head yesterday. It's ridiculous. They're not only in the business of screwing the consumers, but they also screw over the artists. A shameful organization.

[Mr. Fed]

RIAA's prior inconsistent statements.

Unfortunately, they are talking about statutory interpretation, not an issue of fact, so it is of limited use.  There is a possible judicial estoppel argument, though.

[PaulBot]

RIAA: EAT MY SHORTS!!

[kronovan]

Just who the hell are the RIAA? I thought the were a bunch of guys that liked Guinesses, the color emerald green and wanted Ireland to be 1 with itself again...no?

[ericb]

I'm pretty sure the RIAA could be considered prostitutes...they get paid to screw people as hard and as much as possible.

[CrayolaSmoker]

I'm pretty sure the RIAA could be considered prostitutes...they get paid to screw people as hard and as much as possible.

Except when I hire a prostitute I'm not the one with a sore asshole the next morning.

[olaf]

Do you get the feeling that if there were groups like RIAA around thousands of years ago we would not have libraries?

[unbreakable]

Here: this is pretty messed up.

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings.

"I couldn't believe it when I read that," says Ray Beckerman, a New York lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA. "The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your computer is a violation."

RIAA's hard-line position seems clear. Its Web site says: "If you make unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're stealing. You're breaking the law and you could be held legally liable for thousands of dollars in damages."

...

The Howell case was not the first time the industry has argued that making a personal copy from a legally purchased CD is illegal. At the Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, testified that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a song you bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,' " she said.

But lawyers for consumers point to a series of court rulings over the last few decades that found no violation of copyright law in the use of VCRs and other devices to time-shift TV programs; that is, to make personal copies for the purpose of making portable a legally obtained recording.

...

The RIAA's legal crusade against its customers is a classic example of an old media company clinging to a business model that has collapsed. Four years of a failed strategy has only "created a whole market of people who specifically look to buy independent goods so as not to deal with the big record companies," Beckerman says. "Every problem they're trying to solve is worse now than when they started."

The industry "will continue to bring lawsuits" against those who "ignore years of warnings," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy said in a statement. "It's not our first choice, but it's a necessary part of the equation. There are consequences for breaking the law." And, perhaps, for firing up your computer.

[Kevin Grey]

Here: this is pretty messed up.

*Cough* first post *cough*

[unbreakable]

Here: this is pretty messed up.

*Cough* first post *cough*

LOL... I checked the links... but obviously skipped the first post.  Me = 

Not a good way to start a new year!