Recording Industry Now Okay With Letting You Listen To Your CDs On Your iPod

from the how-kind-of-them dept

In the past, the recording industry has made it very clear they’re not at all happy with the idea of people ripping songs off of legally purchased CDs for the sake of listening to them from their computers, portable music devices or burned CDs (remember how upset the industry was at Steve Jobs for “Rip. Mix. Burn.”?). That’s part of the reason why they’ve been shoving copy protection rootkits onto newer CDs. A few months ago, industry representatives even claimed that “fair use” doesn’t cover ripping CDs to listen to on your digital music player. Instead, they claimed that they were simply looking the other way when people did that out of the kindness of their heart. While it can be argued whether or not it’s fair use in the US, apparently it’s not covered in the UK — and the recording industry has magnanimously decided to ask the government to change copyright laws, to allow people to rip their own CDs, so they can be listened to on other devices. Of course, it’s ridiculous enough that the industry has to give its approval to such a move. Also, considering how often labels are now putting copy protection on CDs, combined with anti-circumvention laws, all the industry has to do is put copy protection on CDs and they’ll still be able to ban those personal copies.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Recording Industry Now Okay With Letting You Listen To Your CDs On Your iPod”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
49 Comments
Kualla says:

Re: Von, thats exactly what I thought after reading th

Unless this story is seriously lacking information, that sounds like a bunch of BS. This would have passed one way or another but for it to get passed by the RIAA simply asking does not make a bit of sense. Im not a government expert but I thought there was a long process that had to take place for laws to get passed, am I missing something here???

ConceptJunkie (profile) says:

Re: Weaklings.

They are not spineless and pathetic at all. This is a coldly calculated move to make them look more reasonable when the opposite is true. Their magnanimousness is a ploy. By appearing to allow something that is already clearly covered by Fair Use, they are appearing to make a concession. The sad thing is that this will probably buy them brownie points with Congress, who will then proceed to capitulate on any new legislation they want to pass which will give them more leverage to stomp all over the rights they have so “generously given” to us.

Don’t be fooled for a minute. This is just more posturing by a corrupt organization of companies that are desperately fighting to maintain the free ride they have had for so long. And I’m sure their lapdogs in Congress (Orrin Hatch call your office) are wetting themselves in excitement to serve their masters’ new demands.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Changing the Laws

This is a country of the people. I want to know who decided the corps are people.

The people who continually vote the republicans and democrats into office term after term after term. if you’re really serious about getting rid of corrupt government bought and paid for by the megacorps find some new parties to support come November. Otherwise ya deserve the reaming ya get.

oftro says:

Cd is a dying media

I think the RIAA should forget about cd’s. It’s a bit too late now to think about changing laws. There is a clear shift to purchase music through download pay sites. What’s so special about distributing music by cd that the RIAA now asks to change the law? Instead of focusing on cd sales, why not focus on online sales?

Ben Robinson (profile) says:

Digital DJ

There is almost no Fair Use rights here in the UK, you cannot copy anything ever unless you have a specific license to do so. The PPL (the UK organisation reponsible for public performance and broadcast licensing of the sound recordings owned by most UK record labels), are trying to get digital (i.e. MP3) DJs to buy their “Digital DJ License”. For you £200($350ish) a year you don’t get any public performance or broadcasting rights, you do not get the right to download anything or rip anyone elses CDs. All you get is a license to rip to your hard drive, CDs and vinyl you already own, and for personal use only. In the USA this would be covered by standard fair use rights, but we have no such thing in the UK.

godkillzyou (user link) says:

The thing we all need to remember is that the ‘best and the brightest’ aren’t running our country – they’re running corporations. The people running our country are your average, run-of-the-mill C students. So, basically, anything that corporations want, corporations get… because they’re smarter. And because they’re smarter, they have all the money – which they use to lobby/bribe senators, congressmen, etc. It’s like the cool kid in school getting the geek to do his homework for him. Our representatives in government are merely little assholes which companies stick money into, in order to get what they want. Then we’re stuck smelling the RIAA’s finger.

godkillzyou (user link) says:

The thing we all need to remember is that the ‘best and the brightest’ aren’t running our country – they’re running corporations. The people running our country are your average, run-of-the-mill C students. So, basically, anything that corporations want, corporations get… because they’re smarter. And because they’re smarter, they have all the money – which they use to lobby/bribe senators, congressmen, etc. It’s like the cool kid in school getting the geek to do his homework for him. Our representatives in government are merely little assholes which companies stick money into, in order to get what they want. Then we’re stuck smelling the RIAA’s finger.

Future CEO says:

Re: Re: Good Stragety

Ok, so I’m not the smartest (about 8 people smarter, jk) so there is only one way to for me to become smarter…get people smarter than me to work for me. Pay them what they deserve, listen to them and guide their collective thoughts.

I’ll be writing a book soon…

You don’t have to know it all if you know someone who does. Besides, not all people (even really smart ones) are capable/would even want to be the guy at the top…lotta people gunning for ya up there.

James Susanka says:

was it illegal?

I have been doing this for years – I always rip my cds to ogg format because it is free and unencumbered by patents.

Then I put the original cd in a safe spot.

And good lord I even copy the cd to other cds because I don’t want to use the original in my car.

Such crimes – I guess I better go into hiding.

If I spend 30 bucks on a cd that I alredy bought in an album then they tell me I can’t copy it to play on any of my owned computers. Well they can stick the cd’s where the sun doesn’t shine.

I will still continue to buy cds because I believe I have this right (fair use) and I will never buy anything online that has DRM in it. I did the same thing with albums and tapes – I always made copies of albums with tapes to put in my car.

Evan (user link) says:

The RIAA has huge cajones!

I can’t understand why they feel the need to “allow” us to do this? We’ve been doing it since it was possible and would continue to do it even if they told us we can’t. I think the only reason they are doing this is to boost record sales and cover up the whole mess they have made with “copy-protected” cds. They would never be able to 100% prevent people from copying CDs without releasing them on a new platform and anyone with 2 pebbles for a brain would not buy into a platform that restricts them from listening to THEIR music.

Is copying your music going to really affect record sales. They would argue that people who want to listen to their music on a portable digital device should buy the CD and a digital copy. The first problem with this idea is that not ALL music is available in digital format and certain devices only play music in certain formats (which would require you to convert the file format). I’m sure that RIAA would not be happy with us converting our MP3’s into AAC’s, they would want us to purchase the file in each format separately because that would be fair use.

Let’s take a simple analogy to their ludicrous ideas. Suppose I have a document that I purchased in Word format. It is relatively simple to convert that document into a PDF, just a click of a button, but I should purchase the document in both formats. I should be required to pay for someone else to convert my document when I am qualified to click a button and do it for free. Suppose the even worse condition where I wanted a physical copy of that document. Instead of using my laser printer, I should pay for a hard copy of the document.

Now I am not condoning those people who might take the digital copy, convert it to hard copy and then sell it as that WOULD be ILLEGAL. But, when we are sold the document or song or CD we should have the right to do whatever we want with it as long as we don’t profit from it or violate copyright and trademark laws.

Thanks RIAA for your approval to convert my CDS to MP3s, I appreciate all that you have done for me musically!

Judge Dredd says:

Since when did anyone abide by the law? It’s like saying nobody speeds on the interstate because cops enforce the speed limits. As long as technology exists, people will continue to do as they please with what they purchase or copy. I personally dont feel bound by the ‘rules’ set forth by the recording industry and their pawns in office. What I do on MY computer in MY house with MY accessories is my business. In my opinion, there is another Vietnam happening, except this time its online and the recording industry fills the USA’s shoes. Too many you cant see. The ones that do get caught, are in a sense, sitting in the lobby of their local police station selling downloaded CDs to cops on their lunch break.

Dr. Daemon J. Thrion D.D., PhD. says:

Pay the artist not the corp.

If anyone ever feels a pang of guilt over whether, or not they paid for, or paid enough for a piece of music, then drop a letter in the mail with your donation to the artist and explain what you are doing. I’m sure the artists will appreciate whatever you send MUCH more than their evil overlords. As a freelance audio engineer I see most bands coming off their first album and tour owing their recording company money (often much to their chagrin considering the number of units moved). This forces them to tour much more agressively and for longer than they would if left to their own devices leaving them tired and in bad spirits. It is also not a good bargaining position to go into your next project owing money to those cthuloid things that are demanding another disc that is better than the last and to have it done now. Slip a few bills to the band and help the whole scene (except the multinationals who are making obscene profits standing on the backs of the people creating the content that the peddle through Clear Channel and the other schlock mongers). As for the Supremes (no, not those Supremes) handing the cookie jar to the corps, it was more of an “Oops” than a direct action of the court.

Steve says:

Back to my rant...Do some research.

From the RIAA website:

http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp#stand

“Ask the RIAA

At the RIAA, we receive a range of questions on various topics. Our web site provides you with tools to find your answers to most questions, but in this space we’ll also answer some of the questions we receive most often or those that aren’t answered elsewhere on the site. To submit a question, send us an e-mail.

What is your stand on MP3?

This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That’s not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that’s great. It’s your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail. But the fact that technology exists to enable unlimited Internet distribution of music copies doesn’t make it right.”

Celloman (user link) says:

Audio Home Recording Act of 1992

Not sure if it’s been mentioned – but I’d thought I’d remind y’all of this:

Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 provides the buyer of a CD or cassette with the right to not only make a copy for their own personal use, but also to make copies for friends as long as the original owner is not selling the copies or receiving any other type of compensation.

From Wikipedia:

“Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (AHRA) amended the US Copyright Act by adding chapter 10 “DIGITAL AUDIO RECORDING DEVICES AND MEDIA”. The act was prompted by the release of the Sony Digital Audio Tape (DAT). The RIAA, concerned that consumers ability to make perfect digital copies of music would destroy the market for audio recordings, had lobbied Congress to pass the legislation.

AHRA brought new measures to prevent prohibition of manufacturing, importing, or selling of digital records and allowing consumers to be exempt from infringement for private noncommercial recordings in return for a royalty for the music being copied, a royalty for every recorder, and serial copy protection built into home devices. President George H. W. Bush signed the AHRA into law in 1992 proclaiming ” S. 1623 [AHRA] will ensure that American consumers have access to equipment embodying the new digital audio recording technology. It also protects the legitimate rights of our songwriters, performers, and recording companies to be fairly rewarded for their tremendous talent, expertise, and capital investment.”

But as other have pointed out – this article is about the UK’s lack of Fair Use rights. Perhaps “Mike” should have included that in the headline?

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...