The RIAA has lost their minds!

I copies this information off another site, but thought this might make for an interesting discussion.

Apparently all of us criminal mp3 player owners out there should start shaking in our boots because the RIAA is coming after us.

Here is a brief excerpt from the article:

Quote :

The RIAA, which lobbies on behalf of a music industry hammered by tumbling sales as fans increasingly turn to free downloads and file sharing for their listening pleasure, insists that it is illegal for someone who has legally bought a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/31/riaa_cds_copies_computer/

Wow! That is insane. I have spend thousands and thousands of dollars on records, tapes and CDs over the years. I own several thousand CDs. In the 80's and 90's I made myself a tape copy of my CDs to listen to in my car. What's the difference if I make an MP3 copy of my CD to listen to as long as I paid for the CD.

Shoot, in some cases, I have purchased the same album over several times. I still own some albums in both CD and vinyl format. How ridiculous to say I cannot put the songs on my iPod.

ult

What do you all think?

that's a bunch of crap. i buy my music... how i chose to play it should be up to me.

Quote :

Shoot, in some cases, I have purchased the same
album over several times. I still own some albums in both CD and vinyl
format. How ridiculous to say I cannot put the songs on my iPod.

it's the same with me 100%. i agree with you.

Thats crazy. If you buy something, you can do with it what you want, you can even sh.it on it and put it in your as.s if you like it. Of course you can not make illegal copies and sell them etc...but you can play them where you want.

I totally agree! It's just as insane as the parents organisation for ''offensive lyrics''. I don't download illegaly if I can help it, but banning it...no.

Perhaps they can back sue all of us from the 80's that use to make tape compilations and pass them around. Sure it was those tapes that helped to get bands like Metallica and Slayer so popular, but it's still stealing. We are all criminals.

Yawn... another day, another hairbrained scheme by the RIAA...

When a kid know something is illegal he will do it more an more, just to be cool and what RIAA is doing is make all those kids download even more by making everything illegal.

It don't matter. They are placing "chips" in newborn babies now. So, Big Brother will know when you light a fart before to long anyways. And there is not a damn thing you can do about it. I am amazed that we have not become MORE desensitized to that fact that our freedoms are being raped more each day.

SAXON1500 wrote:

They are placing "chips" in newborn babies now.

....like dogs? [sarcasm]Nice. I love America.[/sarcasm]

Sounds like the Execs at the record companies are worried about there bonuses and stock options - instead of innovating and coming up with new business models, they are going after someone who, like Ult said, essentially just making a "mixed tape" on their computer. Suing someone for makng a mixed tape would have been laughed out of court in the 80's. The RIAA is controled by the top executives at the record companies.

Now, I do have a problem with downloading music, movies, etc for free (since that is essentially walking into a store and picking up music at a "five finger discount". But, making copies of your own music to transfer to your ipod is not the same thing - it's just making the music you akready bought more protable. I hope the guy wins and sets a new standard (you buy a CD, you can copy it and move it to your own ipod). I see no difference than making a copy of your vinyl onto a cassette so you can listen to it in you car or on your walkman.

Just another case of the big executives trying to keep their bonus checks fat and raise the price of their stock (since that's where the real money is made).

This is totally ridiculous. I put all of my cd's on my computer and then burn them for playing elsewhere so as not to scratch my originals. How awful of me wanting to protect my investments.

I'ts all a bunch of crap & will never fly. There are a lot more serious things to worry about than "illegal Downloads" How about overpaid artist & record companies? Hopefully it will eventually drive the music back underground where it belongs anyway & the days of $20 dollar cd's will be over.

I have no problem sharing an album that the band will see no profit from as it is OOP. Like Vordul wanted the Meanstreak album, Sax wanted some weird Raven-like album awhile back and T-Roy wanted the Jesus Freaks debut, and I posted links to the stuff. Those bands are no longer around and no one sees royalties from that material, so I see it as public domain stuff. Better to share than to buy it from an EBay vulture for $100.00.

But if you buy an album you should be able to use it personally however you like, methinks. Now for me to go and post Ultimatum's new album, that would be completely wrong. But everyone should already own that one.... I have copied Ultimatum's stuff on my Zune and no one should be able to tell me that it is illegal to do that, as I have bought or traded for those albums.

The article above is incorrect. The guy being sued is not being sued for ripping cd to mp3s but rather downloading them illegally which is what the RIAA does..

http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/30/riaa-not-suing-over-cd-ripping-still-kinda-being-jerks-about-it/

The article goes on to point out that fair use has covered transforming media into other forms for personal use and it has not been challenged. I would like the RIAA to sue someone and have case history to establish precedent that it is fair use to enjoy ones cds on the computer as mp3s

Alex

What I think of this article......

thrasher73 wrote:

What I think of this article......

I thought your little smiley was scratching the side of his face.

spectrefate wrote:

thrasher73 wrote:

What I think of this article......

I thought your little smiley was scratching the side of his face.

He is,He's the little scratch the side of his face guy.

What the hell?

Don't they have better things to spend their money on? I mean honestly, targetting people that are actually paying for their music is so a.ss backwards, what exactly is the case here?

Read the second article - they are going after a guy for downloading music he doesnt own... the article at the top of this thread reported incorrectly...

Alex

exact33 wrote:

Read the second article - they are going after a guy for downloading music he doesnt own... the article at the top of this thread reported incorrectly...

Alex

Yes, apparently the early reports were incorrect. He is being sued for downloading. However, they are also making the case about "Illegally ripping CDs to the computer" as well.

The RIAA case is about the downloading but are also trying to mention that they feel conversion is wrong. They are expressing their concern over the issue but as it has been in case law for cd to tape and other archival material - the end user has the right to backup their material as long as they dont share it. If the guy loses it will be over downloading and not cd ripping - which unless the court goes wild - will remain legal.

The RIAA has every right to sue people violating copyright rules. You know when your downloading illegal material and if your caught you should pay the fine. I dont get what people think is wrong with an entity protecting its rights to sell material that they own and make lots of money off of. People who download are not robin hoods. They do not do it for the good of others - just themselves. Do it and get caught = pay the price...

Alex

exact33 wrote:

The RIAA has every right to sue people violating copyright rules. You know when your downloading illegal material and if your caught you should pay the fine. I dont get what people think is wrong with an entity protecting its rights to sell material that they own and make lots of money off of. People who download are not robin hoods. They do not do it for the good of others - just themselves. Do it and get caught = pay the price...

i doubt you'll find anyone here who would argue against that. my problem was more with the notion that i cannot rip my cds onto my ipod to enjoy them on the go. i find the whole idea of criminalizing that to be outlandish. i seriously doubt anything like that would fly in a court of law, however just the idea of it pisses me off.

That's stupid. I agree.

ultmetal wrote:

Wow! That is insane. I have spend thousands and thousands of dollars on records, tapes and CDs over the years. I own several thousand CDs. In the 80's and 90's I made myself a tape copy of my CDs to listen to in my car. What's the difference if I make an MP3 copy of my CD to listen to as long as I paid for the CD.

I think RIAA is trying to emulate what the software companies are doing with their lame "license per comuter" smurf poo. I guess RIAA expects you to buy a dedicated CD for every CD player you own.

SAXON1500 wrote:

It don't matter. They are placing "chips" in newborn babies now. So, Big Brother will know when you light a fart before to long anyways. And there is not a damn thing you can do about it. I am amazed that we have not become MORE desensitized to that fact that our freedoms are being raped more each day.

If madelane had a chip they would have found her already. Not a bad thing those chips for babies IMOP