In the U.S., the IRS has decided that in-kind trades of services are
taxable income (you fix my car, I'll chop down your tree), and the IRS
has won on that point. This would favor Jeff's point to some degree
-- if in-kind trades are a form of income, they are commercial
activity. It is absolutely clear in the U.S. that money need not be
involved for commercial activity to take place.
However, I still think he's wrong -- I still think a court would find
that two people trading two legally recorded MDs with one another
would not constitute commercial activity. The original MD recordings
were legal and there's no strong showing that anyone lost any income.
Prince Gaz's point that you don't know if someone would have bought
the CD is an excellent one, and might hold sway in an American court.
People are just sharing each other's musical tastes on a very small
scale for exploration and entertainment, and the minidisc equipment
has facilitated this form of sharing and enjoyment. If you could show
the other person would definitely have bought the CD otherwise (which
is pretty near impossible, I think), the case for copyright
prosecution would be much stronger. However, the odds of prosecution
based on small-scale one-on-one trading of MDs is very near zero, and
questions of constitutionally protected freedoms would come into play
in the U.S. It's an area frought with risk for the recording
companies if they ever want to pursue it. If they lose, it's a
disaster; if they win, little is gained. In my view, if someone
really likes the MD of the CD, there's a strong chance he'll go out
and buy the CD.
>The original question was about trading of recordings. My reading is
>that trading of a non-commercial nature (i.e. not for money) using
>AHRA compliant devices is protected under the AHRA. I'd be happy to
>read a section of law that you think refutes this.
>
>Best wishes,
>Rick
I think the ethics debate is inextricably intertwined with the legal
debate. Because whether trading MDs is legal is a grey area in the
U.S, the question of right and wrong becomes relevant, especially
where we are deciding if someone's a crook or not. I personally don't
think it's wrong for two people to trade MDs on a small scale to
explore each others' musical tastes, though I've never done it,
because I have no other personal acquiantances with MDs.
Whether trading MDs is legal is such a provocative subject becuase it
hits a grey border of the law in the U.S. and a border which divides
people based on their values. The values of a person on either side
may be admirable.
>p.s. I would like to add that I think ethics issues are present when
>copying a CD you didn't buy, but that we should leave ethics alone
>since personal beliefs also enter the picture and we will never settle
>those here. We do however, have a slight chance of settling the legal
>status of home taping and trading in the US. Let's stick with that,
>okay?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
