RIAA Goes After Fair Use Doctrine

[Dan4510]

RIAA says you dont own what you own...lol..in the long run the RIAA will lose only after it kills its own customer base.

********************************

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

full articles:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html

http://www.hothardware.com/News/RIAA_Goes_After_Fair_Use/

 

[Shannow]

At the rate they are going, remembering the lyrics and singing to yourself as you mow the grass will land you in court.

 

[simple_gifts]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11778602

You cannot show people how to play guitar with songs you didn't write either.

 

[Shannow]

When Mum was Vice Principal in the Catholic School system and they wanted to have a Christmas Carols fundraising evening, they had to purchase licences for the carols, plus sign a declaration that all of the lyrics sheets were destroyed after the event.

Licence fees ran at over $100 for a single night use.

School couldn't afford to teach the kid's Christmas carols.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, there's a pickle here. Copyright for sheet music is a horse of a different color. The school only had to purchase the music once. It's not like they paid on a "per performance" deal.

Now the issue of not being able to put a bought and paid for CD on your computer stinks a bit. The user wasn't depriving the owner of revenues; nor gaining revenue in the transfer. I thought that law allowed you to make a copy of paid for copyrighted material as long as you didn't distribute it. I don't think that THAT law limited or specified how you back up your paid for copy.

 

[Gary Allan]

I read both articles/offerings ...but I didn't see how they determined that this guy had these recordings on his computer to even send the letter

The RIAA has to approach this from the other end of the technology. They should be buying heavily into MS or whoever produces ripping software and tariff it heavily to produce the revenues that they're losing. Not that I really welcome the notion; but it would give them a passive choke where they have none at this point.

 

[oilyriser]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11778602

You cannot show people how to play guitar with songs you didn't write either.



From what I remember, copyright does not give you the rights to the tones described in sheet music or performed in a recording. You can sing your own version of a song, and it becomes yours. You cannot make copies of someone else's performance, or make copies of the written music without permission. Have the laws been changed?

 

[Win]

IIRC, they had the files in a shared directory, and didn't hire counsel.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/200...fringement.html

 

[simple_gifts]

OR, the song is protected by laws, not just the recording. If you create an album and cover 12 different people's songs you need to license the right to do that.

 

[oilyriser]

I can understand the words to a song being covered, but chords?

 

[simple_gifts]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_Lewis_and_the_News#Ghostbusters

Quote:

In 1984, Huey Lewis & the News were contacted by the producers of Ghostbusters in regards to developing the theme song for the film. The band decided not to, and Ray Parker Jr. was instead signed to develop the theme. Later that year, the band sued Parker, citing the similarities between the Ghostbusters theme song and their earlier hit "I Want a New Drug"

 

[Vilan]

I recall hearing that making a parody version of a song doesn't require you to get permission from the original author. Folks like Weird Al play the same chords as the original song, just different words, and it's legal. Could you just change one word and claim it's a parody and get away with it?

 

[oilyriser]

I think anything five words or more copied is not allowed, but I haven't read the laws in a long time.

 

[Al]

The term "Fair Use" is not that straight forward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/checklist.pdf

In my former working life I was a Mechanical Maintenance Instructor in the Nuclear Power Industry. I can tell you that most Instructors that present "Non-Canned" instructional material are on the side of the fence that "Allows" Fair Use. But it is a subject that can cause some Angst. I wojuld guess that Instructors in the Academia are in the same position.

A friend of mine has been recently turned in by one of his students for violation of the policy. His Director (This is a College) is reviewing the allegation..with the possibility of him being terminated. I told I don't think they (the College) have a clue what an instructor is faced with in developing Material.

If they do and fire him the will essentially put themselves out of business. Unless you are willing to spend bazillions for canned (and inferior) material...you must take advantage of "Fair Use". I told him that I would argue on his behalf and that if he loses he certain litigate it successfully.

 

[Win]

Anyone who wants to read the RIAA position in this particular case can do so here:

http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDFfull.asp?filename=atlantic_howell_071207RIAASupplementalBrief

As with most internet hoopla and fear mongering, what is actually happening has been pretty badly misrepresented.

Watching the RIAA litigation is kind of like watching a train wreck in progress, but If I owned property, intellectual or tangible, I would not want it stolen, either.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

My flash drive, I-pod, and those of my wife and the harddrives we have contain alot of material, very little of wich we have a reciept for anymore or the original copy. You can share files in many ways, through hardware and software, online and off. I can't percieve of a reason from abstaining from using the technology I purchase to make my life more convenient. RIAA Needs to get proactive and stop reacting to what they cannot control.
Attempting to make criminals out of consumers probably is not the best way to build loyalty to the industry.

 

[Gary Allan]

Okay, that answers the distribution angle. No problem.

I would like to find out the selection process for enforcement. I have a funny feeling that the Howells were thoroughly researched for net worth before Ira ever considered filing. Not that it's necessarily wrong to do so ..but it kinda bolsters the lack of any "principle" involved in the actions. "Ching-ching!"

Now the Howells are in that position of the boy with the guitar in "The Glass House". "Hey, kid...it's either me ..or them three.

"

..bottom line lesson.. Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine. Every one that was targeted could surely have either bought the material legitimately ..or chose not to distribute it.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan


I would like to find out the selection process for enforcement.



My not so WAG is that they go to suit on cases that are slam dunk, no possible chance of losing, so as not to risk any adverse precedent.

At least that's how I would do it .....

 

[benjamming]

Sure they select the slam dunk cases, but of those many possibilities, how do they narrow it down from there?

 

[Gary Allan]

..but I would still think that Ira wouldn't waste his time with anyone who he had no potential yield from.