RIAA Sues Man for Ripping Legally Owned CDs to His Computer

[TB666]

Oh, and apparently the WP article is kinda poorly phrased. While the RIAA do call the ripped songs "illegal", that isn't what they are suing for; they are suing for placing the songs in a shared directory.

So, I put all my music in a shared folder so that I can connect to my computer through my Xbox360, thus make me able to listen to my music while playing.
That's illegal then ?? Even tho, I only share with myself ??

[R'as al Ghul]

That's illegal then ?? Even tho, I only share with myself ??

Since the Jammie Thomas case the RIAA tries to establish that ripping a CD to digital format is already a breach of copyright. Putting it in a shared folder makes you a pirate if your PC has an internet connection. If not than they'll just sue you for breaching copyright.

If you choose to take our own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's illegal. It's our music and we only want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail if you continuously pay us for each instance.

Fixed.

[TB666]

Bastards, plain and simple bastards.
And what is worse is that it doesn't matter if it's illegal or legal in the country that you live, they will demand that you get shipped to the US to stand trial.

[English assassin]

Sick, disgusting. I hope the la[w]yer somehow has an accident.

Yeah, yeah, "first thing we do lets kill all the lawyers", teh old. Unless the lawyers really have initiated this whole sue the customers business strategy all on their own, in which case you have a point.

The case itself really is mind boggling. I hadn't realised that if I copied a CD to a computer I shared with my family, it makes me a pirate. I'd better take all the CDs out of the car, too, because sometimes the whole family listens to those, even though only I bought them. Three of them are young children, but hell, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be sued, does it?

[R'as al Ghul]

I hadn't realised that if I copied a CD to a computer I shared with my family, it makes me a pirate. I'd better take all the CDs out of the car, too, because sometimes the whole family listens to those, even though only I bought them. Three of them are young children, but hell, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be sued, does it?

No, it does not. But first it's gonna hit you because you're illegally broadcasting intellectual property to a wider audience without paying any royalties to the artists. That's like illegally lending out a book for which only you bought the license to read it, to your wife. You wouldn't do that, would you?
What's more, the possibility that someone gets access to those files while your machine is online makes you a pirate. (Iirc the possibility alone was an argument in a prior case)

[Lemur]

No, it does not. But first it's gonna hit you because you're illegally broadcasting intellectual property to a wider audience without paying any royalties to the artists.

This argument has already been made -- successfully. In the UK, a car mechanic shop was successfully sued because its mechanics were listening to a radio loud enough for customers to hear in the waiting area. This constitutes an "unlicensed performance." I'm not kidding.

Here's the background on the case.

[TB666]

Indeed.
Same with listening to your MP3 player too loud on a bus or what not.
It counts unlicensed performance.

[DukeofSerbia]

This argument has already been made -- successfully. In the UK, a car mechanic shop was successfully sued because its mechanics were listening to a radio loud enough for customers to hear in the waiting area. This constitutes an "unlicensed performance." I'm not kidding.

Here's the background on the case.

OMG, what's the next!?

[English assassin]

This argument has already been made -- successfully. In the UK, a car mechanic shop was successfully sued because its mechanics were listening to a radio loud enough for customers to hear in the waiting area. This constitutes an "unlicensed performance." I'm not kidding.

Here's the background on the case.

Hold up. This is BRILLIANT news. So, next time a small penised teenager driving some crappy little hatchback which he has "customised" with 30 lbs of the finest fibreglass drives past me with 200 decibles of hip hop blaring out, the performing rights society is going to sue his pimply backside?

Gentlemen, we have found the silver lining to this cloud.

[Duke of Gloucester]

This argument has already been made -- successfully. In the UK, a car mechanic shop was successfully sued because its mechanics were listening to a radio loud enough for customers to hear in the waiting area. This constitutes an "unlicensed performance." I'm not kidding.

Here's the background on the case.

I can't find anything to tell me that this suit was successful, just that it passed the first legal hurdle in October. Since these things take ages I suspect that the matter is still before the courts. Your link says:

"Kwik-Fit asked the court to dismiss the suit at a procedural hearing last week, citing its official, anti-radio policy. The judge refused to dismiss the £200,000 claim, however, saying that there was at least enough evidence such that the case should be heard. He made clear, however, that his allowance of the suit did not necessarily mean that he felt the PRS would succeed."

In any case, the suit is not about playing music too loud; it is about using music to enhance your customers' experience of the business. If this gives you a competive edge you could argue that those who performed the music should get some of the extra profit. This is not the same as a private individual copying legally purchased CDs on to a computer or an MP3 player.

[R'as al Ghul]

This argument has already been made -- successfully. In the UK, a car mechanic shop was successfully sued because its mechanics were listening to a radio loud enough for customers to hear in the waiting area. This constitutes an "unlicensed performance." I'm not kidding.

Yes, I know. I'm not making things up.
EA is off the hook (for now) though because he only gives a private presentation of his CD's.

BTW, here's the new report about the state of privacy worldwide:
http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd[347]=x-347-559597 (Gah! Already posted in another thread)

[KukriKhan]

And, Kukri, the Congress ? Who do you think passed the DMCA ? Who passed all these laws ? Who gives the go for creating that Federal branch ?
As for elections - why would that make a difference, since the re-election rate of congress-critters is 90% ? It'll be the same folks. And the remaining 10% will be from the same breed, anyway...

Of course, you're right. My point is: the courts are obliged to enforce by the law(s) currently poorly-written. The only way to fix this problem ("problem" from our point-of-view) is for those law-writers to write better law - law that does not criminalize 65% of the population, for 2 big reasons:

1) it's unfair to a vast swath of the citizenry
2) it breeds contempt for law generally

Congress are the guys with that job assignment; they're 'busy' campaigning for the next 8-9 months.

[Husar]

Bastards, plain and simple bastards.
And what is worse is that it doesn't matter if it's illegal or legal in the country that you live, they will demand that you get shipped to the US to stand trial.

You mean it's a free ticket to the US?
*sets up dozens of filesharing programs*

[TB666]

You mean it's a free ticket to the US?
*sets up dozens of filesharing programs*

Do you really wanna spend time in a american prison ??

[Beirut]

And what is worse is that it doesn't matter if it's illegal or legal in the country that you live, they will demand that you get shipped to the US to stand trial.

Try it!

[TB666]

Try it!

Well watch it, they are armed with the most terrifying weapon of all time.
Artists like Britney Spears. If you don't go peacefully they will sing outside your door.

[JimBob]

In any case, the suit is not about playing music too loud; it is about using music to enhance your customers' experience of the business. If this gives you a competive edge you could argue that those who performed the music should get some of the extra profit.

Somewhat true. But the way that radio ratings are being counted is changing. The Portable People Meter (PPM) reads what frequencies a user encounters. So a store playing it has higher ratings and thus more ad revenue. So they do make more money from it.

[English assassin]

Well watch it, they are armed with the most terrifying weapon of all time.
Artists like Britney Spears. If you don't go peacefully they will sing outside your door.

You do know Canada has Celine Dion, don't you? Not to mention Bryan Adams. Any attempt to attack Canada by way of buttock clenchingly awful popular music artistes will be met with overwhelming retaliation in kind.

Well I'm glad you find this hilarious.

@crossLOPER: You DON'T find the idea of a copyright association suing car mechanics for listening to the radio in customers earshot a teeny tiny bit hilarious?

[hellenes]

Its so funny how people love and nurture predator dominant capitalism...talk about being brainwashed...