OT: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

[Alias]

HeyBub wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In Europe,
>> every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to pay
>> royalties and fair use is the golden rule here.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Uh, the "Gestapo" was a European thing.

Key word: "was".

>
> The US operates under the rule of contract: that is, a willing buyer and a
> willing seller agreeing to terms of a transaction. We take a dim view of
> thieves.

Riiight. The US has stolen how many natural resources from 3rd world
countries?

>
> Often we shoot them. Sometimes we shoot a pre-thief.

If that were true, all the politicians in the USA would have already
been shot a long time ago.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

Stephan Rose wrote:

>
> Though tell ya one thing...
>
> If someone seriously wants my fingerprints to sell me a frigging CD,
> they'll have to cut off the finger from my dead body to do so.
>

Don't give the RIAA any ideas -)

Alias

 

[Ray Shafranski]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> (from
> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>
>
> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>
> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>
> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
> intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal
> for someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.
>
> As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
> Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs,
> industry officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto
> one's computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
>
Complete hogwash.

 

[dennis@home]

"Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message news:flil83$ns7$1@aioe.org...
> jim wrote:
>> (from
>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)

8<

>
> Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In Europe,
> every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to pay royalties
> and fair use is the golden rule here.

Are you confusing the extra royalty paid on audio CD blanks?
You don't pay any extra on a pre-recorded CD/DVD other than the usual
rip-off that gets added to any market that is willing to pay.
Also you don't pay any extra on ordinary CD/DVD blanks, which is why so many
audio CD recorders were chipped to use the ordinary blanks.

 

[dennis@home]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
news:qKOdnUkqY9CUcOHanZ2dnUVZ8uGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:49:38 -0500, caver1 wrote:
>
>> Gilgamesh wrote:
>>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> (from
>>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/
> recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>>
>>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>>
>>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>>
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let
>>> you make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately
>>> that is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>>
>>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to get
>> around the law. Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people
>> of the movie industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is
>> no good because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the
>> copy is a pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make
>> copies.
>> Sounds like greed to me.
>
> Sounds like someone that won't be receiving any of my business to me.
> Matter of fact, it'll only make it more likely that I'd choose to buy an
> illegal copy instead. An illegal copy won't have the restrictions of a
> legal copy and would therefore likely be my preferred choice.
>
> Take music for instance. I have all my songs in a huge library on my hard
> drive. So if I want to listen to one particular song, I just have to type
> in it's name. If I just want to listen to any one random song of one
> artist but any album, I can do so too. If I want to listen to any random
> song of my collection, which is usually how I have my media player set
> up, I can do that as well.
>
> Now let's compare this with what the RIAA and other DRM advocates would
> like. They don't want me to copy the music from my CD. I can no longer do
> *ANY* of the above. I'm only able to listen to songs that are on the CD
> and nothing else.
>
> Listen to a random song I own? Not possible.
> Listen to a random song from any one artist (or selection of)? Not
> possible.
> Quickly find one particular song I'd like to listen to? While it may be
> physically possible to locate the CD quickly, it's still a hassle to have
> to switch physical media.
>
> Bottom line, I *DON'T* want that. It makes life for me as a consumer more
> difficult and reduces my ability to enjoy my content.
>
> Now if I buy illegal copies...
>
> Listen to a random song I own? Possible.
> Listen to a random song from any one artist? Possible.
> Quickly find one song? Possible.
> Do anything else I like? Possible.
>
> So why would anyone, in a DRM world, choose DRM content when non-DRM
> content has clear advantages when it comes to actually using the content?
>
> The same goes for movies. I actually have external hard drives that
> contain copies of my movies. As I use my computer with a TV attached to
> view my movies, this makes it very easy for me to watch any movie I want
> which I *legally* own.

Unfortunately your definition of legal and the legal definition of legal may
be different.
If the RIAA gets its way they will be different.
However they will have an awful lot of people to take to court and if every
one of those bought a few shares in the media companies they would soon
change their minds once they were unemployed.

 

[Tim Slattery]

"HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote:

>The US operates under the rule of contract: that is, a willing buyer and a
>willing seller agreeing to terms of a transaction.

Ideally, but when it's a transaction between a huge corporation and an
individual, the corporation unilaterally lays down the conditions. The
consumers only choice is not to buy. It's *not* a level playing field.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
Slattery_T@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

 

[caver1]

Tim Slattery wrote:
> "HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The US operates under the rule of contract: that is, a willing buyer and a
>> willing seller agreeing to terms of a transaction.
>
> Ideally, but when it's a transaction between a huge corporation and an
> individual, the corporation unilaterally lays down the conditions. The
> consumers only choice is not to buy. It's *not* a level playing field.
>


http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/top200text.htm
caver1

 

[DanS]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"Beamguy" <nobody@noplace.com> wrote in
news:ZD6fj.11867$tK5.8119@trndny03:

> This appears to be a new policy of the RIAA - and they have not yet
> had time to update their website. They go into more detail elsewhere,
> but here it is from straight from their webpages...
>
> http://www.riaa.com/faq.php
>
> 11. How is downloading music different from copying a personal CD?
>
> Record companies have never objected to someone making a copy of a CD
> for their own personal use. We want fans to enjoy the music they
> bought legally. But both copying CDs to give to friends and
> downloading music illegally rob the people who created that music of
> compensation for their work.

WRONG !!!! Very few recording artists get a large cut of CD sales. 95% of
profits from CD sales go to the record comapnies.


> When record companies are deprived of
> critical revenue, they are forced to lay off employees, drop artists
> from their rosters, and sign fewer bands. That's bad news for the
> music industry, but ultimately bad news for fans as well. We all
> benefit from a vibrant music industry committed to nurturing the next
> generation of talent.

Now what's REALLY bad for the record companies is the fact that they have
not changed their business model in 70 years. Times change and technology
changes, everything changes and companies have to change as well to keep
up with it.

Here's what I think the music companies should do.....sell direct. Come
on, it cost < $1 to make each CD, so why do we pay so much ?
Distribution. Everyone along the way makes a buck. It DOESN"T go to the
artists.

Why they don't sell direct I don't know. It makes a lot of sense. The
record companies themselves would make more money as thay could actually
charge more per CD selling direct retail instead of to high quantity
distributors, who then sell to smaller qty distributors, until it reaches
the stores.

Here's what I can see.....

A (or several) giant warehouses. All fully automated. A person would
place an order on their website for whatever CD's they want, the order
would be forwarded to the packaging area, the CD(s) would be
automatically picked, and packed, wrapped up, posted (or whatever
shipping method) and then loaded on a truck to go to whatever shipping
depot was chosen.

Almost no human intervention needed once everything is set up and running
properly.

The company could get $5 for each CD, probably 2 to 3 times the amount as
compared to selling in large quantity to other distributors.

Other companies do this, why can't they ? Because they refuse to.

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Shafranski
<me@privacy.net>
wrote
on Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:00:49 -0000
<5u4im5F1f7vppU1@mid.individual.net>:
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> (from
>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>
>>
>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>
>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>
>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>> intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal
>> for someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.
>>
>> As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
>> Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs,
>> industry officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto
>> one's computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
>>
> Complete hogwash.
>

No, just confusion of the issue. One cannot equate
ripping songs for personal use with putting them on a
high-bandwidth server and advertising their availability.

Presumably the latter is what Jeff Howell is guilty of.

However, the copying of the disc could be construed as
a violation, as both are physical copies -- metaphysical
copies being generally impossible. It really depends on
how the law is worded, after all, and the law is probably
screwed up anyway.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Windows. Multi-platform(1), multi-tasking(1), multi-user(1).
(1) if one defines "multi" as "exactly one".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Alias]

dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message
> news:flil83$ns7$1@aioe.org...
>> jim wrote:
>>> (from
>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>
>
> 8<
>
>>
>> Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In Europe,
>> every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to pay
>> royalties and fair use is the golden rule here.
>
> Are you confusing the extra royalty paid on audio CD blanks?
> You don't pay any extra on a pre-recorded CD/DVD other than the usual
> rip-off that gets added to any market that is willing to pay.
> Also you don't pay any extra on ordinary CD/DVD blanks, which is why so
> many audio CD recorders were chipped to use the ordinary blanks.

We pay what is called a "canon" on blank CDs and DVDs.

Alias

 

[Martha Adams]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
news:%234NrL%23gTIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Gilgamesh wrote:
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>> (from
>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>
>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>
>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let
>> you make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media.
>> (Unfortunately that is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>
>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>
>>> jim
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to
> get around the law.
> Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people of the movie
> industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is no good
> because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the copy is
> a pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make copies.
> Sounds like greed to me.
> caver1

I think they're trying to eliminate that formal nuisance
called "probable cause," which is disliked in Washington.
To do away with it, you have to start somewhere. Is
this it?

Cheers -- Martha Adams [cola 2008 Jan 3]

 

[caver1]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

Martha Adams wrote:
>
> "caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
> news:%234NrL%23gTIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Gilgamesh wrote:
>>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> (from
>>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>>
>>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>>
>>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>>
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let
>>> you make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately
>>> that is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>>
>>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to
>> get around the law.
>> Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people of the movie
>> industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is no good
>> because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the copy is
>> a pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make copies.
>> Sounds like greed to me.
>> caver1
>
> I think they're trying to eliminate that formal nuisance
> called "probable cause," which is disliked in Washington.
> To do away with it, you have to start somewhere. Is
> this it?
>
> Cheers -- Martha Adams [cola 2008 Jan 3]
>
>



That's true. Its a real nuisance to the RIAA.
But even probable cause only gives the right to
obtain a warrant or uder the right circumstances
to do a search. It does not give the right to find
someone guilty in its own right.
caver1

 

[caver1]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Shafranski
> <me@privacy.net>
> wrote
> on Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:00:49 -0000
> <5u4im5F1f7vppU1@mid.individual.net>:
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>> (from
>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>
>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>
>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>> intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal
>>> for someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.
>>>
>>> As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
>>> Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs,
>>> industry officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto
>>> one's computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
>>>
>> Complete hogwash.
>>
>
> No, just confusion of the issue. One cannot equate
> ripping songs for personal use with putting them on a
> high-bandwidth server and advertising their availability.
>
> Presumably the latter is what Jeff Howell is guilty of.
>
> However, the copying of the disc could be construed as
> a violation, as both are physical copies -- metaphysical
> copies being generally impossible. It really depends on
> how the law is worded, after all, and the law is probably
> screwed up anyway.
>



They are not suing him for the copies. Probably
because they couldn't win that one.
He is being sued for sharing which under those
circumstances could be wrong.
I said could be because he hasn't been found
guilty yet.
But just because you could have or might have is
not did.
They should still have to prove that he did.
The butler did it. But you still have to prove
that he did to convict him. Proving that he could
have is not good enough.
caver1

 

[Mark R. Cusumano]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"caver1" <caver@inthemud.com> wrote in message
news:#4NrL#gTIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Gilgamesh wrote:
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>> (from
>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>
>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>
>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
>> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that
>> is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>
>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>
>>> jim
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to get
> around the law.
> Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people of the movie
> industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is no good
> because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the copy is a
> pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make copies.
> Sounds like greed to me.
> caver1


I wonder if he is a member of the NRA. I wonder how that rationale would go
with guns. "You cannot know ahead of time id the person buying a gun is a
murderer or no. So then there should be no legal way to buy guns". Hmm,
I can't see that flying well Actually if you want to stop music piracy
just make the sale of music itself a felony!

--
Mark R. Cusumano
Skype Name: mark.cusumano
Web: http://The-Padded-Cell.spaces.live.com

 

[dennis@home]

"Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message news:flj8et$jdt$1@aioe.org...
> dennis@home wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:flil83$ns7$1@aioe.org...
>>> jim wrote:
>>>> (from
>>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>
>> 8<
>>
>>>
>>> Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In Europe,
>>> every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to pay
>>> royalties and fair use is the golden rule here.
>>
>> Are you confusing the extra royalty paid on audio CD blanks?
>> You don't pay any extra on a pre-recorded CD/DVD other than the usual
>> rip-off that gets added to any market that is willing to pay.
>> Also you don't pay any extra on ordinary CD/DVD blanks, which is why so
>> many audio CD recorders were chipped to use the ordinary blanks.
>
> We pay what is called a "canon" on blank CDs and DVDs.
>
> Alias

We don't in the UK.

 

[Alias]

dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message
> news:flj8et$jdt$1@aioe.org...
>> dennis@home wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:flil83$ns7$1@aioe.org...
>>>> jim wrote:
>>>>> (from
>>>>> http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entert...cording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)
>>>>>
>>>
>>> 8<
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In
>>>> Europe, every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to
>>>> pay royalties and fair use is the golden rule here.
>>>
>>> Are you confusing the extra royalty paid on audio CD blanks?
>>> You don't pay any extra on a pre-recorded CD/DVD other than the usual
>>> rip-off that gets added to any market that is willing to pay.
>>> Also you don't pay any extra on ordinary CD/DVD blanks, which is why
>>> so many audio CD recorders were chipped to use the ordinary blanks.
>>
>> We pay what is called a "canon" on blank CDs and DVDs.
>>
>> Alias
>
> We don't in the UK.

It's a Spanish thing I guess, then. Read about it here:

http://todoscontraelcanon.es/ (In Spanish)

Alias

 

[Darth Chaos]

On Jan 3, 8:02 am, "Tom Lake" <toml_12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Stephan Rose" <nospam.no...@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d7KdnR9tCdCMROHanZ2dnUVZ8vCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> > On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:38:51 -0500, jim wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> Just thought you'd like to know....
>
> > I wonder how much they like me stripping region coding and CSS encryption
> > from my DVDs so that I can watch them from my Hard Drives and protect the
> > physical DVDs. =)
>
> Watch out or they'll put the MI5 on your trail! Just ask that guy who
> posts all over the place. 8^)
>
> Tom Lake

I don't care if he's MI5, CIA, Mossad, ISI, the Emperor's Hand, or
some reptilian humanoid from the planrt Zartan (just kidding about
reptilian himanoids). I own my CDs and DVDs. I bought them with my
hard earned money, and dammit, I'm gonna protect my investments by
making back-up copies for my own personal use. As long as there is
still a Constitution and a Bill of Rights, ain't no corporate neo-
fascist gonna tell me otherwise.

 

[Red Henk]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

In article <ZD6fj.11867$tK5.8119@trndny03>,
"Beamguy" <nobody@noplace.com> wrote:

> This appears to be a new policy of the RIAA - and they have not yet had time
> to update their website. They go into more detail
> elsewhere, but here it is from straight from their webpages...
>
> http://www.riaa.com/faq.php
>
> 11. How is downloading music different from copying a personal CD?
>
> Record companies have never objected to someone making a copy of a CD for
> their own personal use. We want fans to enjoy the music
> they bought legally. But both copying CDs to give to friends and downloading
> music illegally rob the people who created that music
> of compensation for their work. When record companies are deprived of
> critical revenue, they are forced to lay off employees, drop
> artists from their rosters, and sign fewer bands. That's bad news for the
> music industry, but ultimately bad news for fans as well.
> We all benefit from a vibrant music industry committed to nurturing the next
> generation of talent.

This sentence make me laugh--
"But both copying CDs to give to friends and downloading
> music illegally rob the people who created that music
> of compensation for their work."

The record labels are not creators. The true creators are the artists,
and they normally get very little from the price, that the person who
buys the DC, pays. Does anyone know what the percentage breakdown of how
the revenue made from sale of a record, is distributed. I'll bet that
the artist gets no more than 5% tops and that get eaten up expenses that
charged to the artist. It's only the superstar artists who actually make
any money on sales of records.

 

[bb]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
news:uukv45-0m8.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
> No, just confusion of the issue. One cannot equate
> ripping songs for personal use with putting them on a
> high-bandwidth server and advertising their availability.

And from the Judge in the Jammie Thomas case, simply making the songs
*available* - even if nobody downloaded any - is illegal.

 

[caver1]

Re: RIAA: It's 'Illegal' to Rip Your Own CDs to Your Own Computer

bb wrote:
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
> message news:uukv45-0m8.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>> No, just confusion of the issue. One cannot equate
>> ripping songs for personal use with putting them on a
>> high-bandwidth server and advertising their availability.
>
> And from the Judge in the Jammie Thomas case, simply making the songs
> *available* - even if nobody downloaded any - is illegal.
>


If you look at the transcript of the case here it
might surprise you. The RIAA is arguing that
Jeffery Howell actually ripped his cds to mp3s on
his computer to share with his wife. Yes they are
in a share folder.
Imagine that sharing with his wife. I don't
understand I always charge my wife to listen to my
music. How else do you think I get my drinking money?
The nerve of the man.
Don't believe me? Look it up.
caver1