Stealing Music or Fair Use?

[LeeTom]

So, I've recently been buying a lot more records (vinyl) than CD's, and really enjoy listening to them more than CDs or MP3s. That being said, I also love to have all my music on my iPod.

If I were to download music from a peer-to-peer network that I already owned on record, would you consider that stealing or fair use?

Opinions? Legal Precedents?

[CorvusCamenarum]

As long as you can prove you own it (i.e. having a physical copy or somesuch), I don't see a problem. Then again, that's just me, and I'm sure that there are some out there who will throw a hissyfit and say you're a thief.

[PlaceofDis]

i think its technically fair use under the law because you have a legit copy of it already purchased

[Sun Baked]

If I were to download music from a peer-to-peer network that I already owned on record, would you consider that stealing or fair use?

Opinions? Legal Precedents?Even though both you and the court may eventually find it "fair use" -- the RIAA wouldn't "know" you already have the records.

So balancing the potentional cost of litigation vs. ease of downloading... is it worth it if the RIAA sends you a Nastygram?

Even if the Legal Precedents are on your side, when the big brother isn't -- it could be a PIA.

Sort of like tempting fate by trying to collect on the "freebie" a hooker promised you, when they are running sweeps to clean up the street. ;)

[WinterMute]

"Fair Use" is currently illegal in Europe, although the law is under review.

ANY copying of a covered recording is illegal, whether you own it or not, it's pretty clear in the copyright declaration.

You may not "backup" your DVD's and CD's.

Downloading any media is against the law.

Nearly everyone does it though, and the safety of anonimity is almost assured, it's the poor saps who advertise or stand on street corners and in markets who get nicked.

China is currently the world's biggest pirate, the government will subsidise copying factories.

If everyone pirated, there would soon be no new mass-media, no one could afford to make new films or games, musicians would have to make money form gigs again.

Whilst the current situation is so complex and the major companies are so blatantly ripping the public off, there is always the "it doesn't hurt" excuse, but it does hurt, it hurts me and my friends, I lose a lot of revenue every year to piracy, I'd be a richer man if I had recieved everything I was legally entitled too.

Imagine how you'd feel if someone was taking $100 out of your salary every week because "you make 30K a year you won't miss it".

[geese]

[QUOTE=WinterMute]

Downloading any media is against the law.


[QUOTE]

No it isn't. It is only illegal if the material breaches copyright. Using Limewire to download out of copyright material is perfectly legal.

[WinterMute]

[QUOTE=WinterMute]

Downloading any media is against the law.


[QUOTE]

No it isn't. It is only illegal if the material breaches copyright. Using Limewire to download out of copyright material is perfectly legal.

Please read in context, downloading any covered media is against the law.

Of course downloading non-copyright media is legal. :rolleyes:

[clayj]

So, I've recently been buying a lot more records (vinyl) than CD's, and really enjoy listening to them more than CDs or MP3s. That being said, I also love to have all my music on my iPod.

If I were to download music from a peer-to-peer network that I already owned on record, would you consider that stealing or fair use?

Opinions? Legal Precedents?I would say this is fair use UNLESS the music you're downloading is of a higher quality than you would be able to obtain by ripping songs from your records... for example, if you're downloading tracks ripped from CDs (which are probably going to be higher quality than tracks ripped from LPs), then that's technically a fair use violation, because you've got something not equivalent to what you paid for. But I wouldn't worry too much about it... as long as you have (and keep) the original records, you're pretty much covered.

[andiwm2003]

"Fair Use" is currently illegal in Europe, although the law is under review.

ANY copying of a covered recording is illegal, whether you own it or not, it's pretty clear in the copyright declaration.

You may not "backup" your DVD's and CD's.

Downloading any media is against the law.

Nearly everyone does it though, and the safety of anonimity is almost assured, it's the poor saps who advertise or stand on street corners and in markets who get nicked.

China is currently the world's biggest pirate, the government will subsidise copying factories.

If everyone pirated, there would soon be no new mass-media, no one could afford to make new films or games, musicians would have to make money form gigs again.

Whilst the current situation is so complex and the major companies are so blatantly ripping the public off, there is always the "it doesn't hurt" excuse, but it does hurt, it hurts me and my friends, I lose a lot of revenue every year to piracy, I'd be a richer man if I had recieved everything I was legally entitled too.

Imagine how you'd feel if someone was taking $100 out of your salary every week because "you make 30K a year you won't miss it".


you say any copying is illegal. does that make any kind of ripping my cd's into itunes (for use on my ipod or to create a copy for my car) illegal?

from your points i think it's clear that downloading of mp3's (or ripping them of a friends cd) for music i own on vinyl is illegal. is that right?

what you say is true for europe i guess. what about the USA?

last question but most important to me (since you seem to be affected by all this stealing/copying). What is your personal opinion of me ripping my legal cd's into itunes for my ipod or my car cd player? do you think thats o.k.?

andi

btw.: i never stole any music. all my songs are from legal cd's.

[geese]

[QUOTE=geese][QUOTE=WinterMute]

Downloading any media is against the law.




Please read in context, downloading any covered media is against the law.

Of course downloading non-copyright media is legal. :rolleyes:

Maybe i like being pedantic.

[strider42]

So, I've recently been buying a lot more records (vinyl) than CD's, and really enjoy listening to them more than CDs or MP3s. That being said, I also love to have all my music on my iPod.

If I were to download music from a peer-to-peer network that I already owned on record, would you consider that stealing or fair use?

Opinions? Legal Precedents?

I'd say its not fair use. My understanding of fair use means you have the right to copy your own Cd's, vinll, whatever. You don't have the right to get a copy from someone else for free. Add to the the matter that the digital copy you want to get is probably a higher fidelity than the vinyl you already have, and the RIAA and the courts would undoubtedly find this does not fall into fair use because its not you making a copy of the media you already own. its getting a higher fidelity recording from a different source.

[LeeTom]

I just want to add a note that I believe that vinyl is a higher quality than CDs. A 44.1KHz digital recording loses a lot of the natural harmonics that affect timbral quality. I believe that an vinyl record, if it could be measured in KHz, would be equivalent to somewhere in the 80 or 90KHz range, especially with a high quality needle, turntable, and speakers, which I have.

And I definitely view 192kbps MP3s, which I am hypothetically talking about downloading, to be of a much lesser quality than vinyl.

Lee Tom

[rainman::|:|]

Yes it's legal to have the copies, NO it's not legal to download them from another person's computer... even if you own the file, that's still considered copyright infringement since it's changing hands.

But, if you own the original, and the transfer itself is the only illegal thing, you're probably not in any real trouble.

But as was said, you're still exposing yourself to RIAA subpoenas during the downloading...

[CanadaRAM]

Please, Guys and Gals:

Fair Use is the wrong term to use. It does not mean "It is fair to do this" -- Call that "legitimate use" if you like, but not Fair Use.

Fair Use is a specific legal term under the US Copyright legislation (Title 17, Section 107) http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 (* below)

It is a USA-only concept. Canada has superficially similar legislation that is fundamentally different legally. Don't know about anywhere else.

Fair Use protects reporters, teachers, students, authors and the like from prosecution when they quote portions of copyrighted works for the purposes of commentary, criticism, education and research. There are criteria that are applied to the intended use that must be met to qualify the copying for Fair Use, including
- how much of the work is being copied,
- what the intended use is (education or reporting, vs commercial),
- the nature of the material being copied, and
- the impact on the copyright holder.

Fair Use does not apply to the copying of media for personal (or other) use.
I don't know what US legislation covers that. The Betamax decision doesn't really apply because it pertained only to broadcast video that was being offered for free (if you are being offered it free over the air, then you can tape it and view it later for private and non-commercial purposes). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._v._Universal_City_Studios
Full ruling: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=464&invol=417

In Canada it is legal to make a CD or casette tape copy of music (and only music, not video) for personal use, because we pay a royalty on every blank CD and tape to pay the copyright holders. But it is not legal to make a duplicate and then give that duplicate to someone else.


* Title 17, Section 107
"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

[LeeTom]

OK, thanks for clearing up that term.... any opinions on whether this would be acceptable or not?

Thanks

[Doctor Q]

Yes it's legal to have the copies, NO it's not legal to download them from another person's computer... even if you own the file, that's still considered copyright infringement since it's changing hands.Are both parties infringing, or only the one who gives the copy? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the recipient already has a copy of the same material in the same format (CD) and whatever rights come with that CD purchase. Is the recipient infringing the copyright by receiving a copy by p2p rather than ripping his/her own copy? What if it's the same album but the recipient's CD is scratched? What if it's the same album on DVD or LP or tape?

[WinterMute]

you say any copying is illegal. does that make any kind of ripping my cd's into itunes (for use on my ipod or to create a copy for my car) illegal?

from your points i think it's clear that downloading of mp3's (or ripping them of a friends cd) for music i own on vinyl is illegal. is that right?

what you say is true for europe i guess. what about the USA?

last question but most important to me (since you seem to be affected by all this stealing/copying). What is your personal opinion of me ripping my legal cd's into itunes for my ipod or my car cd player? do you think thats o.k.?

andi

btw.: i never stole any music. all my songs are from legal cd's.

The later posts effectively cover this Andi, fair use allows for the copying of your own legally owned recordings to a back-up medium for your personal use, this is true of CD's, DVD's, VHS etc. so ripping ot your iPod is fine.

The law in the UK is more cloudy, as fair use doesn't exist in law, and we are effectively in breach of copyright even with CD's we own. This is currently under review.

Any downloaded file (that's still under copyright ;) geese) will infringe copyright.

CanadaRAM is correct in his reading of the letter of the law, but there are several US rulings that effectively cover the "back-up" of personally owned recordings.

[strider42]

OK, thanks for clearing up that term.... any opinions on whether this would be acceptable or not?

Thanks

its not legal. You ahve the right to make copies yourself. Getting a copy from someone else is partaking in an illegal activity.

[CanadaRAM]

CanadaRAM is correct in his reading of the letter of the law, but there are several US rulings that effectively cover the "back-up" of personally owned recordings.

Can somebody post or PM me links to the appropriate rulings for personal backup of audio recordings and/or of videos? I found the one for backup of computer software but it specifically excludes audio and video recordings. I'm trying to make sense of the whole thing and would like the chapter and verse.

[LeeTom]

Yes, I can see the logic of why this should be illegal... The person sharing it may not have a right to do so, etc... It is a little murky.

Legalities aside, I DO feel that it is moral. I bought the album once, and now I am just being lazy about recording it. In the end, I get the same thing as if I had recorded it, and the artist has still gotten the money they would get.

I just can't justify buying an album twice, just for the convenience of having it on my iPod. If I had to choose, it would be all records.

Lee Tom

[spinne1]

Technically downloading copies of music that you own on vinyl is a copyright violation. It is not as bad morally, but still illegal. You only have the right to listen to that particular copy you own, and any legal copies you make of it, rather than any other copies, as others have answered.

As for the source of the law, well, it is not crystal clear. US Copyright Law does not specifically address the issue of making personal copies under fair use. However, courts have addressed the issue and therefore made law via interpreting the copyright laws that are in place. The Supreme Court made personal copying legal in 1984 in the case of Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984).

Read the case here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=464&page=417

This case concerned the legality of making copies of television broadcasts for personal use. It was determined that the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act also included this activity in its scope. They state near the end of the case:

In summary, the record and findings of the District Court lead us to two conclusions. First, Sony demonstrated a significant likelihood that substantial numbers of copyright holders who license their works for broadcast on free television would not object to having their broadcasts time-shifted by private viewers. And second, respondents failed to demonstrate that time-shifting would cause any likelihood of nonminimal harm to the potential market for, or the value of, their copyrighted works. The Betamax is, therefore, capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Sony's sale of such equipment to the general public does not constitute contributory infringement of respondents' copyrights.

While the Supreme Court did not specifically state that recording music would also be okay, it has been understood that the principle is the same and therefore also falls under the same logic.

The extent to which personal copying is okay has not fully been hammered out in light of the ease of file sharing. The law as written did not anticipate such technology and therefore will eventually be rewritten to adjust to current and hopefully future conditions. For now, the debate about what that law will be rages on.

[andiwm2003]

The later posts effectively cover this Andi, fair use allows for the copying of your own legally owned recordings to a back-up medium for your personal use, this is true of CD's, DVD's, VHS etc. so ripping ot your iPod is fine.

The law in the UK is more cloudy, as fair use doesn't exist in law, and we are effectively in breach of copyright even with CD's we own. This is currently under review.

Any downloaded file (that's still under copyright ;) geese) will infringe copyright.

CanadaRAM is correct in his reading of the letter of the law, but there are several US rulings that effectively cover the "back-up" of personally owned recordings.


to me its important to be absolutely legal with music, software, video. i'm a scientist and my job depends on my company having their patents not violated. therefore my job (in fact the whole industry) depends on intelectual property. so i made the decision for myself to also respect others rights (i'm a bit extreme on that and fortunately i can afford it). if it was illegal to copy a CD for use in my car i would even buy a second one (although it would be a stupid law). because it would be like having one book and then you steal a second one for your beach house.....

i like the discussion here because most people have a reasonable view on copying music. check out some other places. it's unbelievable how people justify their pirating software, music and videos. they seem to feel entitled to anything digital for free. people hurt by piratery should speak out more often.

having said that, the music industry is a bit dumb in handling this. they really had enough time to adjust their business model.

[clayj]

if it was illegal to copy a CD for use in my car i would even buy a second one (although it would be a stupid law). because it would be like having one book and then you steal a second one for your beach house.....I take a slightly different approach to this... I believe you can make as many copies of your legally-purchased IP as you want, as long as YOU are the only one using it. The music from each of my music CDs exists in multiple places:

- on the original CD
- ripped onto my computer
- on my iPod

But only *I* can use them, and only one of them would ever be in use at any given time. I'm not depriving the publisher of any money... just making it more convenient for myself to use their content for my own personal use.

[andiwm2003]

I take a slightly different approach to this... I believe you can make as many copies of your legally-purchased IP as you want, as long as YOU are the only one using it. The music from each of my music CDs exists in multiple places:

- on the original CD
- ripped onto my computer
- on my iPod

But only *I* can use them, and only one of them would ever be in use at any given time. I'm not depriving the publisher of any money... just making it more convenient for myself to use their content for my own personal use.

as i said, i'm a little extreme on this. but only for myself 'cause i live from people respecting my patents.
you're approach is quite reasonable and i guess most software developers or bands are o.k. with that. it becomes a little iffy when your kids regularly use your car with their friends (or play your copy of doom3 with their friends) but they listen to different music anyway..... :D

[WinterMute]

to me its important to be absolutely legal with music, software, video. i'm a scientist and my job depends on my company having their patents not violated. therefore my job (in fact the whole industry) depends on intelectual property. so i made the decision for myself to also respect others rights (i'm a bit extreme on that and fortunately i can afford it). if it was illegal to copy a CD for use in my car i would even buy a second one (although it would be a stupid law). because it would be like having one book and then you steal a second one for your beach house.....

i like the discussion here because most people have a reasonable view on copying music. check out some other places. it's unbelievable how people justify their pirating software, music and videos. they seem to feel entitled to anything digital for free. people hurt by piratery should speak out more often.

having said that, the music industry is a bit dumb in handling this. they really had enough time to adjust their business model.

Damn right, the major record companies have been burying their collective heads in the sand for nearly 5 years, just hoping it'll go away, they are now in the position of haviing to evolve or they will simply die. In the meantime they are failing their artists by not being able to secure the revenue from performance or sale of recordings under contract.

More than one artist is considering sueing their record company for failure of duty.

I never thought I'd find myself in this position, I'm an old rock 'n roller, a rebel, yet here I am supporting the corporate view. Sadly money talks and bulls*it walks when there are kids to feed and mortgages to pay...

Stealing is stealing however pretty your justifications might be.