Ripping a CD you own is STEALING... - Page 2

HarryT · 10-03-2007, 06:09 AM

But most of the music being "shared" is "current" stuff. That surely deserves copyright protection, don't you think? The number of artists who remain popular past their death is relatively small.

This case has nothing to do with the DMCA. It's straightforward copyright violation - illegal distribution of copyrighted material - nothing to do with DRM or anything like that.

TadW · 10-03-2007, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

"Ripping" your own CDs has never been legal in the UK, and downloading copyrighted material is most definitely a crime regardless of whether you "own" the CD or not. This is like the very silly argument some people make saying that it's "OK" to download an illegal eBook simply because you've bought the paperback.

Well, Harry, if you so strongly agree that ripping your own CDs is illegal and thus a crime, than what do you make of the big cos like Apple delivering the tools which allow you to do so? Have you ever used iTunes?

HarryT · 10-03-2007, 06:14 AM

Please allow me to clarify. While ripping your own CDs is unquestionably illegal in the UK, I don't believe that it's immoral to do so for personal use. This case is about making copyrighted material available for download on the internet, not about copying something you've bought for personal use.

Yes, I use iTunes to manage my own collection of digitised music and audiobooks. Superb software. I've never used the iTunes store, however; I prefer to buy CDs and digitize them myself (and yes, I freely admit that I am breaking UK law by doing so).

TadW · 10-03-2007, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Please allow me to clarify. While ripping your own CDs is unquestionably illegal in the UK, I don't believe that it's immoral to do so for personal use.

How can it be moral to break the law?

HarryT · 10-03-2007, 06:27 AM

That's a decision that we have to make individually. Was it moral not to denounce Jews in Nazi Germany? Some might consider it to be so, even though it was illegal.

CommanderROR · 10-03-2007, 06:32 AM

I think this whole copyright and DRM stuff is really shooting your own foot.
While I am all for buying your own software, music and books, I don't see any reason why this should be more time-consuming than just downloading them illegally and for free.
Ripping your own CDs so you can use them on your mp3 Player or iPod should however always be allowed, no matter what, just like creating mp3 CDs. Not allowing that is simply stupid and more or less forces people into illegality...and once you have gone one step into illeality then you can go all the way right...?

There are ways to fight piracy. I can speak from my own experience.

I used to download music from time to time...I'm a musician and sometimes needed a certain piece that I had to prepare and wanted to listen to. Now, CD stores in town usually have lots of crap(Pop)music CDs, but very little in the ways of classical music. So getting what I wanted was quite difficult usually. Also, I often neede a certain piece, not a whole collection of tracks, and getting that in a CD shop was of course out of the question.
Illegal sources usually had what I needed, they also had it immediately (no need to order and wait, pay shipping...) and for free.
So, of course the temptation to sownload illegal stuff is huge...

Today, I have iTunes. Ever since I installed this software I have been down to alsomst 0 illegal downloads.

Why "almost"?

Well, sometimes I just can't find what I'm looking for on iTunes. I then go to town. If I don't find it there (which is almost 100% sure since iTunes has quite a lot of music available) I download it where I CAN find it. But it hardly ever happens. And this is exactly the way to reduce piracy.
Of course iTunes has DRM, they force you to use an iPod if you want to take your music with you (or burn it on a CD and use any CD-Man so that's Ok) but the only problems I have with their current system are:

1) My girlfriend can't use my music and vice versa
2) I can't redownload tracks for free if I lose my iTunes folder
3) Soemtimes I have to buy the whole CD if a track is longer than a certain, set time

Apart from 2) these are not big issues, so this system works, and someting similar for books, movies, games and software would help a lot of people and of course also keep music sales high.

But if the RIAA and their friends continue the way they are going at the moment, making life difficult and still doing nothing about piracy, then more and more people will move to the pirate bay and just take what they want for free without the hassle...and I would understand and even support them!
Piracy should be discouraged, but it's the "how" that matters!
Stop making legally purchasing and using stuff more difficult. A certain amount of protection is needed to discourage "casual" pirates, but that's it. You can't stop the real hardcore hackers. That's a waste of time and money.

HarryT · 10-03-2007, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CommanderROR

But if the RIAA and their friends continue the way they are going at the moment, making life difficult and still doing nothing about piracy, then more and more people will move to the pirate bay and just take what they want for free without the hassle...and I would understand and even support them!

To repeat yet again, this court case is not about casual downloaders, but someone who appears to have systematically and intentionally uploaded a large number of tunes. One may accept that "casual piracy" cannot be prevented, but systematic uploaders can - and IMHO should - be prosecuted with the full force of the law.

CommanderROR · 10-03-2007, 06:42 AM

@HarryT

casual piracy CAN be prevented or at least reduced, but real, professional piracy in any area, be it hackers or uploaders can't.
All you can hope to do is offer people a legal method that they like more than the illegal method.
That way, the person on trial can upload all she wants...if nobody downloads it's pretty much irrelevant.

HappyMartin · 10-03-2007, 06:48 AM

Thats my point ComanderROR. certain practices make it more difficult to be legal than a pirate.

CommanderROR · 10-03-2007, 06:53 AM

I'd like to give an example from a different area...

Smoking and Alcohol...

Both are forms of drugs, dangerous to individuals and their environment.

Now, you could make a law that says "Smoking is illegal". What would happen is, that the whole deal would go underground. It has happened with Alcohol (Prohibition?)
Now, if you start to teach people that smoking is dangerous, raise prices for cigarettes and make smoking "more difficult" by not allowing it in public places and things like that you won't get immediate effects, but you will see a slowly diminishing number of smokers. We're having this "slow change" in Europe at the moment, and it is working It's slow because the addicts don't die quickly and there is still far too much "Media-induced coolness-factor connected with smoking", but give it another 10-20 years and we might have quite considerably reduced our number of smokers.
This is of course a process that works the other way round, but in principle it's the same
story.

HarryT · 10-03-2007, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CommanderROR

I'd like to give an example from a different area...

Smoking and Alcohol...

Both are forms of drugs, dangerous to individuals and their environment.

Now, you could make a law that says "Smoking is illegal". What would happen is, that the whole deal would go underground. It has happened with Alcohol (Prohibition?)
Now, if you start to teach people that smoking is dangerous, raise prices for cigarettes and make smoking "more difficult" by not allowing it in public places and things like that you won't get immediate effects, but you will see a slowly diminishing number of smokers. We're having this "slow change" in Europe at the moment, and it is working It's slow because the addicts don't die quickly and there is still far too much "Media-induced coolness-factor connected with smoking", but give it another 10-20 years and we might have quite considerably reduced our number of smokers.
This is of course a process that works the other way round, but in principle it's the same
story.

I agree with you and that takes us back to what we were saying earlier, that it needs a change in culture. 30 years ago it was socially acceptable to smoke, and virtually everybody did it. Today, in the UK, if you smoke you are treated virtually as though you had leprosy

. The same change in attitude needs to take place with downloading material from the internet, and people (especially children) need to be taught that simply because it's not a "material object", that doesn't make it acceptable to use it without paying for it.

CommanderROR · 10-03-2007, 08:01 AM

agreed.

HappyMartin · 10-03-2007, 08:02 AM

Amen to that

JSWolf · 10-03-2007, 08:51 AM

What I really find objectionable is protected CDs. I see nothing wrong with downloading music from a CD that you are unable to rip due to it being protected.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 10-03-2007, 08:53 AM

The question isn't whether or not file "stealers" should be prosecuted. The issue here is whether the companies and authorities are stacking the deck unfairly by writing laws that essentially make us all criminals, and therefore liable for prosecution if we just happen to be the one somebody else names.

Right now, that is the situation (in the U.S.). If Apple, for instance, decides I have been stealing from iTunes by disseminating their files for free, whether they have proof or not, they can take me to court. They do not have to present their proof first, in order to drag me into court. They can unilaterally tell my ISP to cut me off, without informing me first, and without proof that I've done anything wrong, my ISP will (in most cases) comply without question. I am considered guilty until proven innocent, at least initially.

This is the state of U.S. laws on digital file protection today. Unlike other copyright protection laws, digital laws allow the accuser to take unilateral steps against the accused before due process, and that's what needs to be fixed.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Editorial: Are Too Many E-books Stealing the Pleasure of Reading?	Bob Russell	General Discussions	75	05-24-2010 12:11 PM
Stealing Light by Gary Gibson	tech_au	Reading Recommendations	5	01-18-2009 01:21 PM
More on ripping CDs	Nate the great	News	10	12-13-2007 12:03 PM
Ripping a CD... UPDATE	Nate the great	Lounge	66	10-18-2007 03:32 PM

10-03-2007, 06:09 AM	#16
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383043 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	But most of the music being "shared" is "current" stuff. That surely deserves copyright protection, don't you think? The number of artists who remain popular past their death is relatively small. This case has nothing to do with the DMCA. It's straightforward copyright violation - illegal distribution of copyrighted material - nothing to do with DRM or anything like that.

10-03-2007, 06:14 AM	#18
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383043 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	Please allow me to clarify. While ripping your own CDs is unquestionably illegal in the UK, I don't believe that it's immoral to do so for personal use. This case is about making copyrighted material available for download on the internet, not about copying something you've bought for personal use. Yes, I use iTunes to manage my own collection of digitised music and audiobooks. Superb software. I've never used the iTunes store, however; I prefer to buy CDs and digitize them myself (and yes, I freely admit that I am breaking UK law by doing so).

10-03-2007, 06:27 AM	#20
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383043 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	That's a decision that we have to make individually. Was it moral not to denounce Jews in Nazi Germany? Some might consider it to be so, even though it was illegal.

10-03-2007, 06:32 AM	#21
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	I think this whole copyright and DRM stuff is really shooting your own foot. While I am all for buying your own software, music and books, I don't see any reason why this should be more time-consuming than just downloading them illegally and for free. Ripping your own CDs so you can use them on your mp3 Player or iPod should however always be allowed, no matter what, just like creating mp3 CDs. Not allowing that is simply stupid and more or less forces people into illegality...and once you have gone one step into illeality then you can go all the way right...? There are ways to fight piracy. I can speak from my own experience. I used to download music from time to time...I'm a musician and sometimes needed a certain piece that I had to prepare and wanted to listen to. Now, CD stores in town usually have lots of crap(Pop)music CDs, but very little in the ways of classical music. So getting what I wanted was quite difficult usually. Also, I often neede a certain piece, not a whole collection of tracks, and getting that in a CD shop was of course out of the question. Illegal sources usually had what I needed, they also had it immediately (no need to order and wait, pay shipping...) and for free. So, of course the temptation to sownload illegal stuff is huge... Today, I have iTunes. Ever since I installed this software I have been down to alsomst 0 illegal downloads. Why "almost"? Well, sometimes I just can't find what I'm looking for on iTunes. I then go to town. If I don't find it there (which is almost 100% sure since iTunes has quite a lot of music available) I download it where I CAN find it. But it hardly ever happens. And this is exactly the way to reduce piracy. Of course iTunes has DRM, they force you to use an iPod if you want to take your music with you (or burn it on a CD and use any CD-Man so that's Ok) but the only problems I have with their current system are: 1) My girlfriend can't use my music and vice versa 2) I can't redownload tracks for free if I lose my iTunes folder 3) Soemtimes I have to buy the whole CD if a track is longer than a certain, set time Apart from 2) these are not big issues, so this system works, and someting similar for books, movies, games and software would help a lot of people and of course also keep music sales high. But if the RIAA and their friends continue the way they are going at the moment, making life difficult and still doing nothing about piracy, then more and more people will move to the pirate bay and just take what they want for free without the hassle...and I would understand and even support them! Piracy should be discouraged, but it's the "how" that matters! Stop making legally purchasing and using stuff more difficult. A certain amount of protection is needed to discourage "casual" pirates, but that's it. You can't stop the real hardcore hackers. That's a waste of time and money.

10-03-2007, 06:42 AM	#23
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	@HarryT casual piracy CAN be prevented or at least reduced, but real, professional piracy in any area, be it hackers or uploaders can't. All you can hope to do is offer people a legal method that they like more than the illegal method. That way, the person on trial can upload all she wants...if nobody downloads it's pretty much irrelevant.

10-03-2007, 06:48 AM	#24
HappyMartin Martin Kristiansen Posts: 1,546 Karma: 8480958 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Johannesburg Device: Kindle International Ipad 2	Thats my point ComanderROR. certain practices make it more difficult to be legal than a pirate.

10-03-2007, 06:53 AM	#25
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	I'd like to give an example from a different area... Smoking and Alcohol... Both are forms of drugs, dangerous to individuals and their environment. Now, you could make a law that says "Smoking is illegal". What would happen is, that the whole deal would go underground. It has happened with Alcohol (Prohibition?) Now, if you start to teach people that smoking is dangerous, raise prices for cigarettes and make smoking "more difficult" by not allowing it in public places and things like that you won't get immediate effects, but you will see a slowly diminishing number of smokers. We're having this "slow change" in Europe at the moment, and it is working It's slow because the addicts don't die quickly and there is still far too much "Media-induced coolness-factor connected with smoking", but give it another 10-20 years and we might have quite considerably reduced our number of smokers. This is of course a process that works the other way round, but in principle it's the same story.

10-03-2007, 08:01 AM	#27
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	agreed.

10-03-2007, 08:02 AM	#28
HappyMartin Martin Kristiansen Posts: 1,546 Karma: 8480958 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Johannesburg Device: Kindle International Ipad 2	Amen to that

10-03-2007, 08:51 AM	#29
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 73,868 Karma: 128597114 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	What I really find objectionable is protected CDs. I see nothing wrong with downloading music from a CD that you are unable to rip due to it being protected.

Advert

Advert

10-03-2007, 08:53 AM	#30
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	The question isn't whether or not file "stealers" should be prosecuted. The issue here is whether the companies and authorities are stacking the deck unfairly by writing laws that essentially make us all criminals, and therefore liable for prosecution if we just happen to be the one somebody else names. Right now, that is the situation (in the U.S.). If Apple, for instance, decides I have been stealing from iTunes by disseminating their files for free, whether they have proof or not, they can take me to court. They do not have to present their proof first, in order to drag me into court. They can unilaterally tell my ISP to cut me off, without informing me first, and without proof that I've done anything wrong, my ISP will (in most cases) comply without question. I am considered guilty until proven innocent, at least initially. This is the state of U.S. laws on digital file protection today. Unlike other copyright protection laws, digital laws allow the accuser to take unilateral steps against the accused before due process, and that's what needs to be fixed.