Different countries have different laws regarding the legality of ripping CDs for personal use; however for the purposes of this case the only laws that matter are those of the United States. It's not legal in the UK, but in the US it has historically been considered legal under the doctrine of Fair Use, which is recognized in the US.
No one is denying that content owners and their agents have a legitimate right (and in the agents one could say duty) to act against copyright violations. However, they also have an obligation to obey the law and follow established legal procedures when seeking redress.
Thus there are two main issues in play in this and most other such cases. One issue is the guilt of the person charged, while the other has to do with the legality of the methods used to gather information and bring the charges. There are strong concerns in the US that the methods used by the RIAA to investigate and prosecute copyright violators are dangerously close to extortion. It's also seen as part of a trend of adjusting copyright law in favor of content providers at the expense of consumers. In a very real way, both sides are on trial here. Regardless of the rightness of their cause, if the RIAA is (as is widely believed) using investigative methods that violate US law and the rights of the accused then they need to stop if only to avoid tainting their evidence and further tarnishing their reputation. This is the first case to go to a jury trial in the four years that the RIAA has been filing such cases. Everyone is watching very carefully.
|