The RIAA goes completely insane

[Charles Dyer]

On 01 Jan 2008, at 00:10:50, objectwerks inc wrote:

>
> On Dec 31, 2007, at 9:05 PM, Karl Kuehn wrote:
>
>> On Dec 31, 2007, at 10:51 PM, James O'Shea wrote:
>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/31/riaa_cds_copies_computer/>
>>>
>>> Anyone who has ever copied a CD onto a computer, an iPod, or other  
>>> digital music system is, apparently, a felon. I await my letter  
>>> from the RIAA. This should be interesting.
>>
>> 	The Register has this a bit wrong. The guy is being sued because  
>> he shared the music on Kazza, not because he ripped the music to  
>> his HD. And there was a round of news about this, and it looks like  
>> he is going to loose on those counts.
>>
>> 	But this is somewhat significant because the layer on the RIAA's  
>> side has been sliding language into his legal briefs that seems to  
>> say that ripping songs from a CD to a computer is "unauthorized  
>> copying". There are two ways of reading that statement: 1) it is  
>> illegal to format-shift information from a CD to your computer,  
>> even for personal use. Or 2) that the format-shifting was no  
>> explicitly authorized by the record label, so is "unauthorized" (by  
>> the record label), but does fall under fair use.
>>
>> 	There is some fear, and fear-mongering, that this language might  
>> make it into the judge's ruling in the case (which is probably  
>> going to be against the defendant), and that this might give the  
>> RIAA a bigger stick to wave both in the declaring format-shifting  
>> illegal (and allow them to win their other cases more easily on  
>> this point), or that it might shore up the very infirm legal ground  
>> in the dispute over ringtones (one of their arguments is that  
>> format-shifting is not in the CD agreement).
>>
>> 	In any case, the Register has completely failed to do any research  
>> on this topic, and should be slapped around a bit. If it wasn't for  
>> the obvious negligence of many "reputable" new organizations I  
>> would point this out as a place that differentiates bloggers from  
>> new organizations... *sigh*
>
>
> This is all the more interesting (the case, not the Register) as the  
> RIAA has said in court, I believe, that the time shifting for  
> personal use of personally owned CDs onto an iPod or computer is  
> allowed under fair use.  I don't have the cite on me but someone  
> else commenting on this case did have it...
>

Sony BMG's top lawyer has also said in court that making just one copy  
for personal use is theft.

"The Howell case was not the first time the industry has argued that  
making a personal copy from a legally purchased CD is illegal. At the  
Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer  
Pariser, testified that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for  
himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a song you  
bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,' " she said."

 From <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html 
 >. I assume that the Washington Post is somewhat more responsible and  
does a little more fact checking than does The Register.