Copyright Police Want Truck Drivers To Have Licensed Cab Music

[wilbur]

I'll give you that.

But downloading something you don't own, but should have paid for, is stealing. No matter how it's justified. And saying people are downloading singles and then buying the album is ridiculous.

The operative difference is that stealing actually deprives someone of something, necessarily.

When it comes to copyright infringement, you're really violating the rules put in place that grant copyright holders a limited monopoly over their creations (its supposed to be limited, anyways). It is true that in some cases, those violations will deprive them of actual sales... in many others though, they will experience no loss at all.

And its always worth keeping in mind, that the terms of copyrights have increasingly, over the years, been tilted in favor of the copyright holders - far, far, beyond their original design - through intense lobbying by organizations like Disney, the RIAA, and the MPAA.

In short, I think the morality is a lot fuzzier when it comes to copyright infringement - than it is with actual theft.

[AmPat]

These truckers should revert back to the pre-radio days and sing incessant verses of 99 bottles and Row, row, row yer boat.

[Odysseus]

The operative difference is that stealing actually deprives someone of something, necessarily.

Such as royalties?

When it comes to copyright infringement, you're really violating the rules put in place that grant copyright holders a limited monopoly over their creations (its supposed to be limited, anyways). It is true that in some cases, those violations will deprive them of actual sales... in many others though, they will experience no loss at all.

No, the copyright laws formally assign copyright holders ownership of their creations. In every case, the distribution of copyrighted material to a third party denies the creator royalties.

And its always worth keeping in mind, that the terms of copyrights have increasingly, over the years, been tilted in favor of the copyright holders - far, far, beyond their original design - through intense lobbying by organizations like Disney, the RIAA, and the MPAA.

In short, I think the morality is a lot fuzzier when it comes to copyright infringement - than it is with actual theft.

It only seems fuzzier because there is no physical reproduction of the product. If I were to sneak into a record plant and run off additional copies of an album on vinyl and then distribute them, you'd agree that I was violating the law. But if I make a digital copy and distribute it, I'm doing the same thing. Now, I agree that RIAA and MPAA have fought to narrowly tailor copyright laws to an absurd degree, but that doesn't mean that the owners of copyrights aren't entitled to compensation when you take their work. Copying a CD so that you can have a copy in your car is not a copyright violation, since you have paid for the original CD and are only acting to extend the life of the product, but selling the copy to someone else is a violation. It's no different from buying bootleg videos on a disc.

[megimoo]

Such as royalties?



No, the copyright laws formally assign copyright holders ownership of their creations. In every case, the distribution of copyrighted material to a third party denies the creator royalties.



It only seems fuzzier because there is no physical reproduction of the product. If I were to sneak into a record plant and run off additional copies of an album on vinyl and then distribute them, you'd agree that I was violating the law. But if I make a digital copy and distribute it, I'm doing the same thing. Now, I agree that RIAA and MPAA have fought to narrowly tailor copyright laws to an absurd degree, but that doesn't mean that the owners of copyrights aren't entitled to compensation when you take their work. Copying a CD so that you can have a copy in your car is not a copyright violation, since you have paid for the original CD and are only acting to extend the life of the product, but selling the copy to someone else is a violation. It's no different from buying bootleg videos on a disc.

When you buy a CD or any form of music distribution the RIAA argues that you don't have any rights to the music other than listening to it from the original CD.

You technically may not copy it to your computer drive or load it onto and listen to it on any other device. The artist signs all rights to the music over to the label and makes no money from the sale of music by the labels.

The RIAA represents the labels not the artists.The artists make their money from touring and shows.

[fettpett]

When you buy a CD or any form of music distribution the RIAA argues that you don't have any rights to the music other than listening to it from the original CD.

You technically may not copy it to your computer drive or load it onto and listen to it on any other device. The artist signs all rights to the music over to the label and makes no money from the sale of music by the labels.

The RIAA represents the labels not the artists.The artists make their money from touring and shows.

actually a court ruled just recently that one can do that. in the Apple Jailbreaking ruling

Jailbreakers are the customers who refuse to fall into line. They hack their iPhones so they can use T-Mobile or other carriers, and they download unapproved software from websites like Rock Your Phone, which bills itself as an "independent iPhone application store." Some of the jailbreakers are classic tech-geek rebels. But others insist that they are acting out of necessity, because Apple's approved products do not meet their needs.
Apple has fought back. It has warned customers that if they install unauthorized apps they risk damaging their iPhones. It has told them that jailbreaking may invalidate warranties. And it has accused jailbreakers of violating copyright law.
(See the top iPhone apps.)
Now the Library of Congress, which operates the Copyright Office, has taken away Apple's copyright argument. Jailbreaking is "fair use," it decided, and therefore not a copyright violation. This ruling on jailbreaking was one of several good decisions issued by the Copyright Office this week. Another one makes it easier for college professors and documentary filmmakers to use small video clips without running afoul of the law.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...#ixzz1HwSROylr

The jailbreak ruling cover's CD's and DVD's and other media for personal use, so the RIAA has no standing on that argument

[megimoo]

actually a court ruled just recently that one can do that. in the Apple Jailbreaking ruling



The jailbreak ruling cover's CD's and DVD's and other media for personal use, so the RIAA has no standing on that argument

Every American teen in creation who has songs on their MP3 players have hacked music .They all share the latest with each other and there's no way the RIAA can do anything about it.The RIAA prefers to go after college kids because they're easier to track and they know their family's have money or at least they did before they sent their kids to college !

[fettpett]

Every American teen in creation who has songs on their MP3 players have hacked music .They all share the latest with each other and there's no way the RIAA can do anything about it.The RIAA prefers to go after college kids because they're easier to track and they know their family's have money or at least they did before they sent their kids to college !

tell that to the single mom in Minnesota that they've tried to destroy for the last 5-7 years

[Odysseus]

When you buy a CD or any form of music distribution the RIAA argues that you don't have any rights to the music other than listening to it from the original CD.

You technically may not copy it to your computer drive or load it onto and listen to it on any other device. The artist signs all rights to the music over to the label and makes no money from the sale of music by the labels.

The RIAA represents the labels not the artists.The artists make their money from touring and shows.

As Fett pointed out, the RIAA got spanked on that point of law.

actually a court ruled just recently that one can do that. in the Apple Jailbreaking ruling



The jailbreak ruling cover's CD's and DVD's and other media for personal use, so the RIAA has no standing on that argument

The RIAA and MPAA are despicable hacks, but that doesn't change the fact that copyrights exist and deserve protection. Ripping an MP3 from a CD for your own personal use is fair use. Mass distribution of someone else's work without compensation is theft.

[RobJohnson]

These truckers should revert back to the pre-radio days and sing incessant verses of 99 bottles and Row, row, row yer boat.

:D

[txradioguy]

Oh poor babies.

I bought Neil Young and Led Zeppelin in vinyl and 8 track.
I bought Donna Summer and Eric Clapton in Vinyl and Cassette.
I bought Duran Duran, Vangelis, Depeche Mode, and Go Gos in cassette and CD.

I have bought Grateful Dead and artists in every medium, and I have paid for concert tickets for Zappa, Waters, BB King, Eric Clapton, Jerry Garcia, Springstein, Talking Heads, Genesis, Go Gos, Donna Summer, Mutants, Mahavishnu Orchestra, Herbie Hancock, The Shirelles, Fred Flowers, Monty Rock, Blood Sweat and Tears, and Grace Jones.

And I have paid to replace my entire collection once because it was stolen.
And now I have paid to replace most of my collection in MP3 form.

The songs I got for "free" were not available elsewhere for the most part, but even if they were I had already bought these songs at least twice before.

In short, I have done my part. If Donna Summer didn't save her pennies when i was raining gold on her head, it's not my fault. I have done my part.

QFT