Copyright - everyone breaks the law!
Copyright - everyone breaks the law!
Author
Discussion

Dracoro

Original Poster:

8,913 posts

262 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
This could go in any number of forums (tv&film, music, computers, news etc.) so we'll start here biggrin

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8000876.stm

Anyone copied music from CD (that you own) to computer?
Anyone got an mp3 player or ipod and copied CD music to such device?

You've broken the law.

daft isn't it. Only need some over-zealous letterlaw plod to see someone with iPod/mp3 device to nick you (chances are the device would have music from a CD) and you're bang to rights!

OK, chances are no plod would do this (ok, apart from your letter of the law types, not naming anyvon in particular) but is that the point?

Plotloss

67,280 posts

287 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
'Fair Use' is coming, thankfully.

Silent1

19,761 posts

252 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Isn't it perfectly legal to make a backup copy of anything you own?

Hence how gamecopyworld.com has never been shut down.

Plotloss

67,280 posts

287 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Silent1 said:
Isn't it perfectly legal to make a backup copy of anything you own?

Hence how gamecopyworld.com has never been shut down.
It is in the US, its not here.

Silent1

19,761 posts

252 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Plotloss said:
Silent1 said:
Isn't it perfectly legal to make a backup copy of anything you own?

Hence how gamecopyworld.com has never been shut down.
It is in the US, its not here.
Thanks Plotters thumbup

Famous Graham

26,553 posts

242 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Plotloss said:
Silent1 said:
Isn't it perfectly legal to make a backup copy of anything you own?

Hence how gamecopyworld.com has never been shut down.
It is in the US, its not here.
Yup, it's enshrined in their Consitution I believe.

One needs to be careful using the term "Fair Use" here though, as it does exist, just not in a form similar to the US. Here, it refers to the use of snippets of music, movie/tv trailers etc - ie you can use a certain length of material without infringing copyright. Can't remember the exact duration though.

Nolar Dog

8,786 posts

212 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Famous Graham said:
...you can use a certain length of material without infringing copyright. Can't remember the exact duration though.
Is that why radio presenters talk over the end of songs?

Silverbullet767

10,972 posts

223 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Nolar Dog said:
Famous Graham said:
...you can use a certain length of material without infringing copyright. Can't remember the exact duration though.
Is that why radio presenters talk over the end of songs?
No, they are just tts, remember people, home taping is killing music.

Mattygooner

5,301 posts

221 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Silverbullet767 said:
Nolar Dog said:
Famous Graham said:
...you can use a certain length of material without infringing copyright. Can't remember the exact duration though.
Is that why radio presenters talk over the end of songs?
No, they are just tts, remember people, home taping is killing music.
I thought it was st music that was killing music?

Famous Graham

26,553 posts

242 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Nolar Dog said:
Famous Graham said:
...you can use a certain length of material without infringing copyright. Can't remember the exact duration though.
Is that why radio presenters talk over the end of songs?
No, it's much less than that, something measured in seconds. As SilverBullet alludes to, I believe the DJ thing is to prevent recording a "clean" copy (and then distributing it). Of course, with the advent of MP3s so many years ago, that's pretty pointless now.


Edited by Famous Graham on Monday 20th April 12:00

Oakey

27,955 posts

233 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Plotloss said:
Silent1 said:
Isn't it perfectly legal to make a backup copy of anything you own?

Hence how gamecopyworld.com has never been shut down.
It is in the US, its not here.
Also, the flipside to that is that they implement technology that prevents you from making 'backups' and circumventing said technology (CSS for example) is also illegal.

Loaded1me

189 posts

211 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Up to 30 seconds maximum can be used without the need to pay PRS. However this depends on the reason you're playing it. For example used in a straight theatre play (non-musical) to cover a scence change, with no interaction from the cast there is no fee payable.If however anyone of the cast acknoweledge that the music is playing, or interacts with the piece then payment is required.

As you couldn't do this in a shop with the radio playing and the general public involved then a licence is needed. The 30 seconds works online as it give you a chance to sample before you buy. It's probable that the site you're buying/listening on has a blanket licence (which isn't what it may seem!).
Basically they get you all ways.

Mattygooner

5,301 posts

221 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
It is quite stupid, there is a place near London bridge that asked a mate of mine to stop danicing because they didn't have the appropriate license.

No moon walking to the bar, your breaking the law.

ben_reza

412 posts

199 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Thats the craziest thing i have ever heard!
Il be honest i dont illegally download anything, i either buy it in itunes, or buy the cd/dvd etc. But i import everything into itunes and onto my ipod. So now im breaking the law?

I think it is time to update the laws for sure. Fair enough, knock off nigel who downloads every film at the cinema, and music he isnt even going to listen to, but the way i see it if a pay for a cd, i should be able to have that in any format i want.

Dracoro

Original Poster:

8,913 posts

262 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
ben_reza said:
Thats the craziest thing i have ever heard!
Il be honest i dont illegally download anything, i either buy it in itunes, or buy the cd/dvd etc. But i import everything into itunes and onto my ipod. So now im breaking the law?
Yes.

Daft isn't it.

IforB

9,840 posts

246 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Stupid law and utterly unenforceable.

If the "artists" and record companies were poor struggling wretches, then I'd have some sympathy, but as they are nothing of the sort, then frankly sod 'em.

I don't use anything like BitTorrents or other filsharing dodginess, but to think that by moving a song from a CD that I bought onto my Ipod is illegal, is utterly ridiculous.

I certainly won't be changing how I listen to music. I don't "steal" any, but this sort of thing makes me think "why not?"

Since it's virtually impossible to stay within the law, then what's the point of even trying?

onomatopoeia

3,512 posts

234 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Dracoro said:
Only need some over-zealous letterlaw plod to see someone with iPod/mp3 device to nick you (chances are the device would have music from a CD) and you're bang to rights!
If any BIB are reading, is copyright violation (or whatever it is called in statute) an arrestable offence or is it one where the copyright holder has to sue you (or both)?

Dracoro

Original Poster:

8,913 posts

262 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
What makes it all the more absurd, is that the "industry" seems to want to bite the hand that feeds. Personally, I've probably spend far more on music than the average Joe, been to countless gigs in my time and so on and seem to think at the same time I'm "wrong" for listening to much of the CDs I've bought on my mp3 player.

People will always copy a mates CD, download the odd unpaid for track and so on but this has always happened and often leads to people getting more into music and paying for the whole CD, going to a gig to see the band they've gotten into and so on.

I agree that they need to make it harder to get hold of the en-masse distribution of pirated music as it's more distributable than it was. And obviously need to stop those who copy and sell on (I remember the tapes "made" by a dodgy mate with photocopied sleeves! biggrin never bought any though) but to stop a mate introducing another mate into the latest new band is no bad thing.

Also, it boils down to money anyway rather than what's "right". Most artists don't seem to be up in arms about this. I see a shift as more new bands can make and distribute/sell their music online without the middle men (record companies) and build up a gig following as they get more popular and go on to bigger gigs and so on. Obviously the manufactured pop rubbish will suffer as they all rely on record labels and so on but less of these bands in the charts is no bad thing!

Problem is bands work for record labels (X year/album contracts, marketing campaigns etc.) rather than the other way round. You get bands rushing albums as record companies dictate they must produce it before they "drop" them.

Maybe music should go back to being an art form rather than a business.

ewenm

28,506 posts

262 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Dracoro said:
Maybe music should go back to being an art form rather than a business.
I still think people should be able to earn a living from their musical abilities. However, as you say, the existence of the record company may be coming to an end with the greater ease of publication by the artists. That would be no bad thing IMO.

jimmy306

3,743 posts

204 months

Monday 20th April 2009
quotequote all
Dracoro said:
T (ok, apart from your letter of the law types, not naming anyvon in particular)
lol