Now, I am curious. Up to now, calling something illegal was mostly a matter of righteous law, maybe, but also a matter of conscience. A properly brought up person would know from infancy what the difference would be between right and wrong
It would appear that, these days, illegality is what fat men smoking cigars and drinking bourbon, scotch or whatever, decide will be good for the economy of their companies, and a pox on whether what they say is morally right, or not.

Quote:

---

?! What are you talking about?!

---

Crooked cops sell drugs; so they can throw people in jail for using them. Record companies and movie studios sell CD/DVD burners; so they can bitch about thieves stealing their copyrighted materials.

I see a constant deluge of pirated concert recordings and phony import albums (that aren't even in the SCHWANN catalogs) for sale on EBAY all the time. Thieves sell counterfeit releases, for three times what they would nornmally cost over the counter. The artists get nothing here! Meanwhile, these brainless RIAA lawyers go crazy about customers who buy their products and rip them to their IPODs. What a crock of BS...

thats why i dont buy CD'S anymore..............
screw these people, it never ends........

Being more of a lurking member, I read a lot of articles but don't really comment. But this is just wrong what is happening here. I can't see how something that was purchased can have restrictions on it. I think that this should go into fair use. Really I'm speechless. I hope that all of the artist realize what is happening and that if they don't leave these companies that are holding on to old business they will end up losing. I just wish that America was a true republic.

This is really crap because if i buy a CD i should be and have the right to do what i want with it however i understand do not make copies and sell the product but you should be allowed to put the songs on your computer or transfer to an ipod or something this is common sense to me however the riaa is taking the fun out of listening to music. Music should take your stresses away not add to them.

This tactic is because they cannot shut down peer to peer or torrent operations. They never had a problem with recording your albums to cassette for some reason, but now ripping to play in your MP3 player a crime? WTF?

---

They (RIAA & MPAA) actually had quite the sh*t fit when audio recorders and Video recorders were firt instroduced in the 70's.

Reel to Reel recorders weren't an issue because the existence of Reel to reel predates both the RIAA and MPAA. It was the primary instrument for creating original recordings in music studio and of course radio station production studios.

All early television use3d actual film cameras.

It wasn't until consumer recording became cheap and inexpensive that the RIAA and MPAA started on the warpath.

The first Cassette recorders and Sony Betamax were the catalyst for the war on consumers waged by the RIAA.

Reel To Reel recorders were made available to consumers in the 60's and 70's and were considered high end and expensive and hence not considered any sort of threat to the record labels.

So yeah, the RIAA always had a stick up it's ass about even home TAPING, recording radio shows with a microphone.

The real Irony is the the only major label member 0f the RIAA that still has a bug up it's ass about the music and PC paradigm is SONY the actual harbinger of the consumer home taping revolution of not just Audio, but Video as well.

As a DJ I've purchased all of the Led Zeppelin stuff on 33 rpm LP's as well as CD's many time over the years.

This year Led Zeppelin released their entire catalog on I-Tunes and Napster (as well as many other legal sites too). I could have got their catalog off limewire, edonkey or any other illegal site, but I paid my $100 and got the entire set, with no need to grab a cassette recorder, or a Bunch of Bland CD's or a blank DVD. I can play it staraight away right on my little portable DJ laptop.

I-Tunes (serving as the distributer) made money as did Atlantic records (the original record company that had signed Led Zep back in the 60's) so who wins with the legal internet store/label/computer/consumer paaradigm? Everybody BUT the RIAA.

The members of the RIAA are not needed in the age of DRM free music sales.

People value music economically. I think even the most profligate priate hobbiest would be willing to pay for the music/movies/games he enjoys and appreciates --- and I'm sure even currently already does.

Back before music could be easily copied and shared (tapes/CDR's) the quality was much better. Now that people can screen new tunes for free BEFORE they buy, only the best stuff will get purchased, so the emphasis will once again be on quality. The Onus for record company profits will be on finding, and promoting and selling greatly talented artists that the public will eagerly spend their hard earned money on.


EFF the RIAA and MPAA!!!!!!!!

Goes to show that BIG BIDNASS(business) and GOMENT(government) writes laws and rewrites laws to benefit themselves and they only pick and choose which laws to enforce. We got laws on immigration but they don't enforce those because slave labor benefits BIG BIDNASS, but they can easily make laws to prevent you from ripping your own store bought CD to put on your MP3 player. Whats this world coming to?

ok everyone lets break it down ... first... how did they even know that this guy had any music on his computer dosnt that like scare anyone.....? second ... lets talk about fair use policy where does it say that we can make a copy .... it dosnt sorry but we have all agreed to this ... third ...but who said we can copy and alter the origonal format to use ...(aka) mp3 sorry again it cant be done legally .. ok so we are buying a media that has faults and is prone to being scratched... not kewl waste of money... so now we have mp3s available as a download if we buy them but we become victum to a virus, dmr or some other issue that can wipe them from our machines.. sad but true.. so if they would garrentee the cd to last or not scratch or have some open door trogen (mp3) we would be happy but they know that we the people will do as we are given to the options of what they are willing to sell us for a few more dollars.... see its always been about the money and now they are asking to tie up our court systems with lawsuits that will amount to nothing, will they next be checking our laptops in our homes to see if we have any music on them we its hard to do that unless they hack into our systems and then they to should be able to be sued as terroist... food for thought everyone if they hack my machine they will find music I have created myself with a watermark and I will sue them for invassion of privicy... to a tune of 50 million to start and from there I wont care because my summer house will be their office....... and they will be scrubbing the floors if the ever want to work again..... yes we are all pissed due to the issues that face the world and our tunes seem to be the last stand but maybe with the current administration we can see the light ... its time for a change ... get someone in charge who recogonises this as a waste of tax payers money and start charging the companys for even filing them man its time we all stand up and were counted and maybe the world can hear a voice of reason.... just let go of it most of buy music be it many forms cds music dvds and mp3s tos a big wold out there how about selling us a alblum that has more then 2 out 18 songs that maybe worth our time listioning to..... I'd buy that ...

In the US border with Mexico they´re checking if you carry burned cd´s and they´ll fined you don´t matter if you purchased that music legally,a nephew of a friend got fined for $5000 so everytime we go to the US got to leave our cd´s in our houses..way to go NAZIS

I love how the RIAA seems to think that devoting National Security resources and task forces against finding single Mum's with Mp3's is a more productive use of resources than going after extremists with MP5's and Semtex.

The amount of money and resources that has been wasted on their bullshit campaign would be astounding. With all that cash they could developed some new, proprietary DRM format for all music record companies to use or something, instead of bitching and whining to the Supreme Court.

Somehow I forgot to put my 2 cents in.

They will never get away with that one. They will have to butt heads with the companies that profit by ripping as well as the public. Even the sleaziest politician would have reservations changing a cornerstone law that could destroy the modern world. The implication to that law is nothing should be copied! To do it correctly they would need to eliminate copy machines and computers. Everything ought to be hand written. Probably CD and other recording technology should be banned as well. The only way to hear music should be live music.

They have come to the realization that ripping is the worst thing for their industry. It took them long enough! Even if a user never shares the music still they have their music in a form that does not wear out. They liked the good old days where listeners would have to pay for there music several times because their vinyl; of tape would wear out.

They figure they will try to change the copywrite law to abolish fair use. Maybe they ought to seize the libraries because they have copy machines. Book publishers are less short sighted then the music industry. They prefer not to alienate their customers. I say lobby to cut the copywrite down to 5 years instead of a century.

The biggest shame is the music industry is in the golden age for making a profit. They just need to sell good quality at a good price. They just can't grow out of the mind set that they have to make a killing every time they sell something. This will kill them!

Gradical, RIAA has attacked HD radio they are getting payments because HD radio has CD quality. HD radio is not close to CD quality but the RIAA as a great imagination.

The guys who make recording media will just say it's for recording other things like podcasts and lectures and all that bogus....

I can't recall the last time I burned a disc. I even have a SONY VAio with a Blu-Ray Disc burner in it. No BRD-R's,CD-R's, definitely no DVD-R's. I just have no need for them anymore. Ironic, since I never owned a computer and rarely used one until I found out about CD recorders back in 1995. If not for the invention of the PC -CD recorder, I never would have even bought a computer.

Now I can't live with out I-Tunes, NAPSTER Drudge Report, Jeff Rense, EBAY, AMAZON and my personal addiction AFTERDAWN.COM---I love my computers!

I suspect this story is NOT TRUE! The court documents claim that Jeffrey Howell had copied music into a SHARED KAZAA folder!

Three of RIAA's four major members are now selling non-DRM downloads. They would not be doing that if they wanted to stop people from making personal copies. Perhaps one of the RIAA's lawyers misstated the RIAA's position.

The fact is, personal copying is legal in the U.S.A. per the Audio Home Recording Act (as long as you don't crack copy protection). If the RIAA wants to change this, they will have to lobby congress to change the law.

Quote:

---

If you make unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're stealing

---

First of all downloading audio from a ptp client is not STEALING.
Imagine this, Daniel raided Mike's house and looted all his furniture,items etc. since Mike no longer has them in possesion he is
a victim of theft. But lets say Dan copied all of his mp3's Mike could still run them, all Dan did was reproduce some 1s and os. Same with so-called stealing satelite signals. You can not steal some for of electromagnetic radiation, signals are everywhere even in your house but did you authorise them to be in your hose. maybe not if your not a subscriber. If somethings in your house it's yours. You wouldn't want a burglar in your house, so what give some multinational corp to transmit it to you. If its in your house you have a right to utilize it. ITS NOT STEALING PERIOD!!!

---

Interesting concept, there, Leningrad. But like all original thoughts, that would have to be proven in court, and this is where your so-called bent judiciary would be outed.
I will be with you in spirit.

Regardless of legal issues Leneingrad has the most valid point of all. The only problem is that it that the the RIAA and the courts will prey on the double standard of it. Legally the issue transcends into privacy in ones home while the other is (for some strange reason) viewed as a theft of services of some sort. In which I really don't see the RIAA or the courts providing any means of services by attacking ones privacy. I believe the key word here is "privacy" but in this day and age we are starting to loose more and more of our privacy everyday. The shit that the RIAA and MPAA are doing is just the tip of the iceberg. It no different then the American law that just came into play that the screening of all phone calls is now considered legal (and I don't remember having a vote for that shit). When someone has an idea to take back the things that are rightfully ours as a whole then I'm all in. Until then its just hot steam and wishful thinking.

Leningrad makes sense. I wish I had paid more attention to his writings. I assume he has contributed in the past.
As long as I am only making copies of my DVDs/CDs, for my own use, i.e, to preserve the integrity of the originals in a safe place, all those people can shout as much as they like. I will keep on making copies.
At this time, I have to add that I have not bought many CDs/DVDs, in the last few years, even before those organisations started to get hungry.
I have this exception to people who take their ( earned ) gains to inject them directly into their veins, or eyelids,or toes, or wherever. Call me foolish, but there you have it. I could go on....

I was going to add: When the RIAA pass a decree, the collective answer should be" Yas suh, massa, right away, massa, would you like me to pass you the whip, massa, so you can punish me? a good whipping will not hurt this niggah, sah!!! ad infinitum.

How exactly is making an extra copy of a CD onto my computer going to hurt the record sales of Britney Spears or 50 Cent (just an example folks lol).

I mean how is this AT ALL damaging to the music industry.
Look at it the this way:

I buy Artist X's new CD.
He receives royalties from my purchase anyway.
I take my CD and copy it onto my computer, so that I can strictly play it on the computer with having the CD in an optical drive.

By making a duplicate copy of a CD, Artist X is not loosing or gaining any money. He simply has one more copy of each song on a digital medium. Because it's on a computer and not on a hard copy like a disc or tape nobody else (necessarily) will have access to it apart from myself.

It's not Camera companies demand royalties for each photo you take using their cameras.

Originally posted by DVDdoug:

---

I suspect this story is NOT TRUE! The court documents claim that Jeffrey Howell had copied music into a SHARED KAZAA folder!

Three of RIAA's four major members are now selling non-DRM downloads. They would not be doing that if they wanted to stop people from making personal copies. Perhaps one of the RIAA's lawyers misstated the RIAA's position.

The fact is, personal copying is legal in the U.S.A. per the Audio Home Recording Act (as long as you don't crack copy protection). If the RIAA wants to change this, they will have to lobby congress to change the law.

---

Wait a mo there grasshopper. All future downloads DRM free, sounds good. Does the same go for cd's and dvd's? For as long as I can remember In the US you cannot circumvent copy protection, even for fair-use. This has not changed, and will not change in the near future. So if you want second rate quality, download and back-up. If you want original quality then buy 2 cd's or dvd's and use 1 of them as a back-up. Thats what these people are saying. And anyway there was much talk about watermarking future music/movie downloads to deter filesharing.

DVDdoug, I think they are selling non DRMed tunes to make a buck. To them there is no right of wrong just opportunities.

Leningrad, is only correct because the law says you can make a copy of a copyrighted material for your own use unless you have agreed not to. Actually for some of the reasons he mentioned. That is fair use. I don't think the RIAA has enough clout to rewrite an old law. I suspect they are blowing smoke. They have a good thing with the crazy 100 year copyright law.

All the RIAA wants is cash, the executives are just sitting behind thier
desks and counting all the cash the made from the lawsuits. Thats just
what capatilism is just plain lies. Although communisim was bad in several ways the knew how capatilisim damaged people and bodies of authority.Yet we see poor people everywhere these people truly need money for thier survival.Poverty is the result of capatilisim.

---

Originally posted by DVDdoug:

Quote:

---

I suspect this story is NOT TRUE! The court documents claim that Jeffrey Howell had copied music into a SHARED KAZAA folder!

---

Your statement got me thinking...
That would indicate Jeffrey ceased and desisted possibly after a near miss and still they came after him with everything they could muster. It would appear once you use per2per you can be on a hit list forever! They will harress you even if they can't actually prove do did anything wrong. I guess they are playing Alice Coopers "No More Mr. Nice Guy". I guess they figure the fear factor is more important than public relations. Maybe they think when the stop selling CDs they can stay in business taking people to court.

Saber Rattling
This is a bunch of crap
The Sony decision clearly states you have the right to copy anything for personal use.
The media mafia is out of their mind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._...y_Studios,_Inc.
Or Google it
Where you break the law as a consumer is the Draconian DMCA law
Which again I personally think is BS
If I own it I can copy it for personal use