Mike Burger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is it any different than having your friend make you a tape recorded copy
>of an album, or burning you a copy of the CD.
We've been down this road before, many time, on this list ;-)
Whether or not copying a friend's CD is a violation of copyright is
clear: yes, it is. You didn't purchase the CD, you didn't purchase a
license to that CD, you're violating copyright.
Whether or not it's "against the law" is not so clear. Some say it is,
some say it isn't. I have heard good arguments on both sides.
Personally (and I'm not alone in this opinion, but some vehemently
disagree, which is their right), I feel that copying a commercial product
such as music or software, for the sole purpose of getting it without
having to pay for it, can be considered "commercial." I'll be interested
to see what the courts rule once someone makes that argument in a case.
As for what you posted from a BBS, that is the most commonly quoted
"justification" for copying friends' CDs (I use quotes because it's not
clear whether or not it *really* allows you to do that). But the thing to
remember is that copyright infringement is usually prosecuted as a
*civil* crime. That is, any action to be taken won't be taken by the
police or the FBI, but by the holder of the copyright. I don't believe
the quoted section from the AHRA protects anyone in that arena.
The fact that we haven't seen court cases against you and me and our
neighbors isn't because we aren't liable for copying CDs we don't own.
It's because a) it's too much trouble; b) the volume of stuff we copy is
relatively small; and c) we had to buy tapes and MiniDiscs and CDs, etc.
-- things that have a relatively high per-unit cost to them that provides
a mild disincentive to copying large amounts of music, and things that
have a "tax" buried in their cost to help "cover" loss of revenue to the
music companies. But with MP3s and the like, it's still a lot of trouble,
but the volume of copied material is HUGE -- people with GigaBytes and
GigaBytes of music, hundreds or thousands of songs -- and there is no
"tax" on the media for record companies and the like to recoup some of
their losses. That's why we're seeing more legal action now.
In addition, with tapes, etc., it was a one-to-one exchange. You come to
my house, borrow a CD, take it home and copy it. Even if EMI sued us,
they couldn't do much more than sue us $15 for each CD we copied. But
with MP3s, the stuff has to be stored/transferred/etc., and there is huge
volume there. That makes for more attractive lawsuits, as they can sue
for hundreds or thousands or even millions of dollars. So we're seeing
lawsuits where we didn't before.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
