[JPL] Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal Use

[Jim Wilke]

Eric,

Of course it doesn't prevent "records" from being "dubbed" - remember  
LP to tape cassette?  The copying that's freaking the record industry  
resulted from quick ripping and peer sharing - 3 or 4 minutes to copy a  
full CD instead of 40 minutes to an hour for an LP.  PLUS the ability  
to pick specific tracks, OR re-order or eliminate them later, OR  
shuffle playback to change the sequence for variety make the mp3 player  
a very different beast from a cassette.   And then when the copiers  
give it away on the internet no wonder the record companies worry about  
how many sales are lost as a result.

Like most of you I have little time for leisure listening.. I'm mostly  
auditioning new CDs, things I haven't heard before and may never listen  
to again.  I did buy an iPod Nano to gain an understanding of why  
people like them so much and think about the impact on radio and  
records.  After transferring some favorite tracks from a variety of CDs  
and downloading a few podcasts, I can understand their appeal.  It bear  
little relationship to the painstaking 1 to 1 dubbing of LP to cassette  
or CD in real time.   Also, having hundreds of tunes you can  
immediately access in a device smaller than a single audio cassette is  
a huge leap.  Yeah, I can see it ...  It's not like making a single  
copy from an out-of-print record for a friend.

I think I'd agree with David's tongue-in-cheek comment.  Most of the  
iPod generation would not be able to figure out how to get a vinyl LP  
into a computer.  The drawer is too little!

Jim

Jim Wilke
Jazz After Hours, PRI
www.jazzafterhours.org


On Wednesday, January 2, 2008, at 08:55  AM, Eric Jackson wrote:

> David Kunian wrote:
>
>> Maybe it's time for labels to move back to vinyl,
>
> That wouldn't help. It's easy enough to copy from vinyl to CD. I just  
> copied a song today for list member Ron Gill. Al it takes is phono  
> cables.
>
> I have a USB turntable that plugs right into my computer and comes  
> with software for the Mac or Windows that allows you to record the  
> audio but as I mentioned you can do it easy enough with just phono  
> cables or maybe a stereo mini plug.
>
> Eric Jackson
> Mon - Thurs 8 pm - mid.
> 89.7 FM WGBH Boston
> www.wgbh.org/jazz
>
>
>
>> but that's probably irrelevant because labels as we know them will be  
>> a thing of the past like the dodo bird.
>>>
>>>
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> Labels at some point will have to sale their products and once out  
>>> of the box, there is no save way to keep it form being "illegally"  
>>> copied. It will be an eternal cat and mouse tech arm race.
>>>
>>> Luis Mario Ochoa
>>> info at CubanMusicProductions.com
>>> www.CubanMusicProductions.com
>>> Tel: 416-654-5410
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "jazzhead"  
>>> <jazzhead at bellsouth.net>
>>> To: <jazzproglist at jazzweek.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 4:06 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [JPL] Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After  
>>> Personal Use
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know specifcally how this person was found out by the  
>>>> RIAA?
>>>> Also, I want to think there was an instance where a label released  
>>>> a CD by an artist that you couldn't copy at all - who was the label  
>>>> and artist? I can't remember offhand.
>>>>
>>>> I would think that in this day and time labels would simply block  
>>>> CDs from being copied period - and just FTP their new releases to  
>>>> radio - reviewers, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Dove
>>>> "Sounds of Jazz"
>>>> "Cafe Jazz"
>>>> Eclectic 89.1 WBCX
>>>> http://www.brenau.edu/about/wbcx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jazz Promo Services"  
>>>> <jazzpromo at earthlink.net>
>>>> To: <jazzproglist at jazzweek.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 6:05 AM
>>>> Subject: [JPL] Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal  
>>>> Use
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/ 
>>>>> AR2007122800
>>>>> 693.html?referrer=emailarticle
>>>>>
>>>>> Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal Use
>>>>> By Marc Fisher
>>>>> Washington Post Staff Writer
>>>>> Sunday, December 30, 2007; M05
>>>>>
>>>>> Despite more than 20,000 lawsuits filed against music fans in the  
>>>>> years
>>>>> since they started finding free tunes online rather than buying  
>>>>> CDs from
>>>>> record companies, the recording industry has utterly failed to  
>>>>> halt the
>>>>> decline of the record album or the rise of digital music sharing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, hardly a month goes by without a news release from the  
>>>>> industry's
>>>>> lobby, the Recording Industry Association of America, touting a  
>>>>> new wave of
>>>>> letters to college students and others demanding a settlement  
>>>>> payment and
>>>>> threatening a legal battle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA  
>>>>> letter has
>>>>> fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty  
>>>>> legal fees,
>>>>> the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step  
>>>>> further:
>>>>> In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a  
>>>>> Scottsdale,
>>>>> Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings  
>>>>> on his
>>>>> personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for  
>>>>> someone who
>>>>> has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his  
>>>>> computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief  
>>>>> filed
>>>>> earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer  
>>>>> from
>>>>> legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted  
>>>>> recordings.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I couldn't believe it when I read that," says Ray Beckerman, a  
>>>>> New York
>>>>> lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA.  
>>>>> "The basic
>>>>> principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual  
>>>>> physical copies
>>>>> to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the industry  
>>>>> has been
>>>>> going around saying that even a personal copy on your computer is a
>>>>> violation."
>>>>>
>>>>> RIAA's hard-line position seems clear. Its Web site says: "If you  
>>>>> make
>>>>> unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're  
>>>>> stealing. You're
>>>>> breaking the law and you could be held legally liable for  
>>>>> thousands of
>>>>> dollars in damages."
>>>>>
>>>>> They're not kidding. In October, after a trial in Minnesota -- the  
>>>>> first
>>>>> time the industry has made its case before a federal jury --  
>>>>> Jammie Thomas
>>>>> was ordered to pay $220,000 to the big record companies. That's  
>>>>> $9,250 for
>>>>> each of 24 songs she was accused of sharing online.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether customers may copy their CDs onto their computers -- an  
>>>>> act at the
>>>>> very heart of the digital revolution -- has a murky legal  
>>>>> foundation, the
>>>>> RIAA argues. The industry's own Web site says that making a  
>>>>> personal copy of
>>>>> a CD that you bought legitimately may not be a legal right, but it  
>>>>> "won't
>>>>> usually raise concerns," as long as you don't give away the music  
>>>>> or lend it
>>>>> to anyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, that's exactly what millions of people do every day. In  
>>>>> a Los
>>>>> Angeles Times poll, 69 percent of teenagers surveyed said they  
>>>>> thought it
>>>>> was legal to copy a CD they own and give it to a friend. The RIAA  
>>>>> cites a
>>>>> study that found that more than half of current college students  
>>>>> download
>>>>> music and movies illegally.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> But lawyers for consumers point to a series of court rulings over  
>>>>> the last
>>>>> few decades that found no violation of copyright law in the use of  
>>>>> VCRs and
>>>>> other devices to time-shift TV programs; that is, to make personal  
>>>>> copies
>>>>> for the purpose of making portable a legally obtained recording.
>>>>>
>>>>> As technologies evolve, old media companies tend not to be the  
>>>>> source of the
>>>>> innovation that allows them to survive. Even so, new technologies  
>>>>> don't
>>>>> usually kill off old media: That's the good news for the recording  
>>>>> industry,
>>>>> as for the TV, movie, newspaper and magazine businesses. But for  
>>>>> those old
>>>>> media to survive, they must adapt, finding new business models and  
>>>>> new,
>>>>> compelling content to offer.
>>>>>
>>>>> The RIAA's legal crusade against its customers is a classic  
>>>>> example of an
>>>>> old media company clinging to a business model that has collapsed.  
>>>>> Four
>>>>> years of a failed strategy has only "created a whole market of  
>>>>> people who
>>>>> specifically look to buy independent goods so as not to deal with  
>>>>> the big
>>>>> record companies," Beckerman says. "Every problem they're trying  
>>>>> to solve is
>>>>> worse now than when they started."
>>>>>
>>>>> The industry "will continue to bring lawsuits" against those who  
>>>>> "ignore
>>>>> years of warnings," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy said in a  
>>>>> statement. "It's
>>>>> not our first choice, but it's a necessary part of the equation.  
>>>>> There are
>>>>> consequences for breaking the law." And, perhaps, for firing up  
>>>>> your
>>>>> computer.
>>>>> -- 
>>>>>