Jump to content
IGNORED

Why the heck is it...


Paul R

Recommended Posts

"In Astral Weeks and "T.B. Sheets" he confronted enough for any man's lifetime. Of course, having been offered this immeasurably stirring and equally frightening gift from Morrison, one can hardly be blamed for not caring terribly much about Old, Old Woodstock and little homilies like "You've got to Make It Through This World On Your Own" and "Take It Where You Find It."

 

*On the other hand, it might also be pointed out that desolation, hurt, and anguish are hardly the only things in life, or in*Astral Weeks. They're just the things, perhaps, that we can most easily grasp and explicate, which I suppose shows about what level our souls have evolved to. I said I wouldn't reduce the other songs on this album by trying to explain them, and I won't. But that doesn't mean that, all thing considered, a juxtaposition of poets might not be in order... "... Lester Bangs :

 

https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/murray.wood/astral.html

 

+ Richard Davis' bass.

 

Lester Bangs. Not much else need be said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Bangs

 

I love that he closes with one of my favorite poets, Federico Garcia Lorca. Here's the start of another Lorca poem:

 

I will sleep the dream of apples...

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
I took my law school class on copyright from a former Commissioner of the US Patent and Trademark Office, which makes (via regulations and sub-regulatory guidance) and administers copyright law in the United States. In addition, during my professional career I've drawn up intellectual property licensing documents and NDAs under both US and Norwegian law, and acted as counsel in copyright and patent litigations.

 

Anything else?

 

Well, yes. You are clearly qualified on the suject. Can you explain the legal theory that copying a CD, keeping the copy, and then selling it is permissible?

 

I could have a goldmine!

Link to comment
With all the music in the world at our fingertips...

 

Our own massive collections, Apple Music, Tidal, Qobuz, Bandcamp, Hundreds of sattelite radio channels, who knows how many internet radio channels, and more, all jusr a finger tap away...

 

I can't find some new music I want to listen to?!

 

(He says listening to ArchAndroid yet again...:))

Not sure if this is exactly what Paul was meaning ... but I find it incredibly hard to FIND new music. Its not that there isn't new music out there I would want to listen to but finding it isn't easy.

 

I still find a lot of new things going to B&M stores (primarily Rough Trade) but also reading things like the "Album of the Evening" thread here and similar threads on other forums as well as reviews in paper/magazines.

 

Radio 6 Music and various other shows on TV and radio help too!

 

Of course there is also both "new" music and "new to me" music.

 

I'm sure I still miss a lot though.

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
Well, yes. You are clearly qualified on the suject. Can you explain the legal theory that copying a CD, keeping the copy, and then selling it is permissible?

 

I could have a goldmine!

 

My prior response, that I'll re-emphasize here, is that throwing out generalizations is worthless, because legal conclusions can change based on specific seemingly small differences in facts.

 

For example, as an exercise for the reader: Does it make a difference, under US law, if the CD one rips and then sells was purchased used from a third party, rather than new?

 

What about under the laws of Canada, the UK, Mexico, France, Germany? Do the laws of the EU govern, those of the individual European nations, or both? (Can this be altered by contractual provisions?) Can you listen to rips of CDs you currently own, or only have them as backups? Can you listen to them remotely or only at home? What about if you have a vacation home or rental? What about SACDs? Can you listen to rips of what you own or even make a rip as a backup? In the US, Japan, India, China, the EU?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Cale was mistaken about the recording process. Though he didn't give direction to the musicians, Morrison was in a vocal booth while the other musicians played in the studio with him. The strings were overdubbed. You can clearly hear this is the case from the newly released outtakes (Beside You Take 1 for example)

 

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/nov/02/vanmorrison-popandrock

Link to comment
Not sure if this is exactly what Paul was meaning ... but I find it incredibly hard to FIND new music. Its not that there isn't new music out there I would want to listen to but finding it isn't easy.

 

I find almost all my new music on enthusiast forums for that style of music, year end lists and sporify related artists

If I am anything, I am a music lover and a pragmatist.

Link to comment
My prior response, that I'll re-emphasize here, is that throwing out generalizations is worthless, because legal conclusions can change based on specific seemingly small differences in facts.

 

For example, as an exercise for the reader: Does it make a difference, under US law, if the CD one rips and then sells was purchased used from a third party, rather than new?

 

What about under the laws of Canada, the UK, Mexico, France, Germany? Do the laws of the EU govern, those of the individual European nations, or both? (Can this be altered by contractual provisions?) Can you listen to rips of CDs you currently own, or only have them as backups? Can you listen to them remotely or only at home? What about if you have a vacation home or rental? What about SACDs? Can you listen to rips of what you own or even make a rip as a backup? In the US, Japan, India, China, the EU?

 

What a bloody mess. LOL

 

All:

God save your majesty!

Cade:

I thank you, good people—there shall be no money; all shall eat

and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one livery,

that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

Dick:

The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

Cade:

Nay, that I mean to do.

"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?"

Peter Aczel - The Audio Critic

nomqa.webp.aa713f2bb9e304522011cdb2d2ca907d.webp  R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

Link to comment
What a bloody mess. LOL

 

All:

God save your majesty!

Cade:

I thank you, good people—there shall be no money; all shall eat

and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one livery,

that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

Dick:

The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

Cade:

Nay, that I mean to do.

You realise they were being satirical and saying that they SHOULDN'T kill all the lawyers don't you?

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
You realise they were being satirical and saying that they SHOULDN'T kill all the lawyers don't you?

 

That's just what Will told his lawyer before he did the Last Will and Testament leaving his wife the second-best bed.

 

Edit: He was apparently better friends with his lawyer than his wife, see The Second Best Bed - All About Shakespeare's Will.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
My prior response, that I'll re-emphasize here, is that throwing out generalizations is worthless, because legal conclusions can change based on specific seemingly small differences in facts.

 

For example, as an exercise for the reader: Does it make a difference, under US law, if the CD one rips and then sells was purchased used from a third party, rather than new?

 

What about under the laws of Canada, the UK, Mexico, France, Germany? Do the laws of the EU govern, those of the individual European nations, or both? (Can this be altered by contractual provisions?) Can you listen to rips of CDs you currently own, or only have them as backups? Can you listen to them remotely or only at home? What about if you have a vacation home or rental? What about SACDs? Can you listen to rips of what you own or even make a rip as a backup? In the US, Japan, India, China, the EU?

 

Putting aside all the hypotheticals, it seemed like a fair and straightforward question.

 

Regardless, I'll answer some of your hypotheticals from a lay person's understanding (with some experience with IP in the software business) of how it works in the U.S.

 

Notwithstanding the ripping, It makes no difference if a CD was purchased new or used. I believe first sale applies to dispostion by first and any subsequent owners.

 

Listening to rips of CDs you own, transforming/copying to your mobile device, etc. are allowed under fair use.

 

If the SACD (or DVD or Blu-Ray or whatever) has DRM, it is tecnically, I believe, a violation of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or whatever it's called to crack/bypass any encryption.

 

So, my interpretation is that you can buy a CD and make copies of it for your own non-commercial use and enjoyment. Once you dispose of the physical CD your digital copies are no longer covered by fair use and become infringements on the original copyright holder's IP.

 

I am unable to google up any court rulings on it, though. Are you aware of any rulings that say it is OK to keep the rip when you sell the CD?

 

Don't know about other countries.

Link to comment
That's just what Will told his lawyer before he did the Last Will and Testament leaving his wife the second-best bed.

 

Edit: He was apparently better friends with his lawyer than his wife, see The Second Best Bed - All About Shakespeare's Will.

 

Not really, don't know Shakespeare.

Best quoted from the "Eagles - Get Over It" I guess.

 

You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash

But you might feel better if I gave you some cash

The more I think about it, Old Billy was right

Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight

You don't want to work, you want to live like a king

But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing

Get over it

"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?"

Peter Aczel - The Audio Critic

nomqa.webp.aa713f2bb9e304522011cdb2d2ca907d.webp  R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

Link to comment
Cale was mistaken about the recording process. Though he didn't give direction to the musicians, Morrison was in a vocal booth while the other musicians played in the studio with him. The strings were overdubbed. You can clearly hear this is the case from the newly released outtakes (Beside You Take 1 for example)

 

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/nov/02/vanmorrison-popandrock

 

For those without streaming services, here's Beside You Take 1.

 

Link to comment
Regardless, I'll answer some of your hypotheticals from a lay person's understanding (with some experience with IP in the software business) of how it works in the U.S.
Generally speaking, a layman's understanding of the law plus $1.85 is worth the price of a tall cup of coffee at Starbucks. :)

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron

 

Link to comment
Generally speaking, a layman's understanding of the law plus $1.85 is worth the price of a tall cup of coffee at Starbucks. :)

 

Doesn't seem to me that brain surgeons have this problem. Audio engineers and lawyers, yes.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Doesn't seem to me that brain surgeons have this problem.

Their cases that have bad results don't make complains. LOL

"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?"

Peter Aczel - The Audio Critic

nomqa.webp.aa713f2bb9e304522011cdb2d2ca907d.webp  R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

Link to comment
Putting aside all the hypotheticals, it seemed like a fair and straightforward question.

 

Regardless, I'll answer some of your hypotheticals from a lay person's understanding (with some experience with IP in the software business) of how it works in the U.S.

 

Notwithstanding the ripping, It makes no difference if a CD was purchased new or used. I believe first sale applies to dispostion by first and any subsequent owners.

 

Listening to rips of CDs you own, transforming/copying to your mobile device, etc. are allowed under fair use.

 

If the SACD (or DVD or Blu-Ray or whatever) has DRM, it is tecnically, I believe, a violation of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or whatever it's called to crack/bypass any encryption.

 

So, my interpretation is that you can buy a CD and make copies of it for your own non-commercial use and enjoyment. Once you dispose of the physical CD your digital copies are no longer covered by fair use and become infringements on the original copyright holder's IP.

 

I am unable to google up any court rulings on it, though. Are you aware of any rulings that say it is OK to keep the rip when you sell the CD?

 

Don't know about other countries.

 

Very little of what you discuss above is legally clear cut.

 

For example: Fair use status even of private copying has not been clearly established in the US. The legal test for fair use involves balancing at least four factors specific to the particular facts of each case. Under these factors, many legal commentators say the question of fair use is entirely separate from whether you sell or keep the CD from which the file was ripped. So the question would be whether the rip itself was fair use, not what you did with the original CD.

 

I'll leave it there, since this is an audio rather than a legal forum and I think more would get very tiresome. Suffice it to say that as a layperson you don't know what you don't know, and one of those things is that your question is anything but "straightforward."

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

I'll leave it there, since this is an audio rather than a legal forum and I think more would get very tiresome. Suffice it to say that as a layperson you don't know what you don't know, and one of those things is that your question is anything but "straightforward."

 

Actually I find this more interesting than, say, yet another discussion on the merits of cryo preserved USB cables :)

 

So, if we copy/rip a CD to NAS, and play at home, the legality of this is orthogonal to the fact that we retain the CD afterwards?

 

Your general impressions are welcome -- I won't hold you responsible if the RIAA raids my abode:) 'sides I use strange file formats and other protection mechanisms that would cost them >100x what they'd ever hope to recover in damages :):):)

 

*** Actually I've had the boundaries of my house declared a unique type of native american reservation -- I've agreed to pay local and state taxes in exchange for having the DCMA not apply within the confines of my abode/adobe

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
Putting aside all the hypotheticals, it seemed like a fair and straightforward question.

 

Regardless, I'll answer some of your hypotheticals from a lay person's understanding (with some experience with IP in the software business) of how it works in the U.S.

 

Notwithstanding the ripping, It makes no difference if a CD was purchased new or used. I believe first sale applies to disposition by first and any subsequent owners.

 

Listening to rips of CDs you own, transforming/copying to your mobile device, etc. are allowed under fair use.

 

If the SACD (or DVD or Blu-Ray or whatever) has DRM, it is technically, I believe, a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or whatever it's called to crack/bypass any encryption.

 

So, my interpretation is that you can buy a CD and make copies of it for your own non-commercial use and enjoyment. Once you dispose of the physical CD your digital copies are no longer covered by fair use and become infringements on the original copyright holder's IP.

 

I am unable to google up any court rulings on it, though. Are you aware of any rulings that say it is OK to keep the rip when you sell the CD?

 

Don't know about other countries.

 

This agrees with what I understand in the USA, I don't know about other countries. Over time I've come to understand that it is morally wrong to keep a copy (analog or digital) of a recording that I have sold or gave away. From some of the reading I've done today I also believe it is a violation of copyright laws.

 

You are correct, it is a violation of copyright laws to defeat copy protection in order to make a digital to digital copy even for a person's own use. I believe the only legal way to make a copy of a copy protected medium such as SACD is using the analog outs from ones player. This is called the analog hole, this type of copying is protected by fair use provided one keeps the original disc.

 

From wikipedia article Digital Millennium Copyright Act

 

"In August 2009, the DVD Copy Control Association won a lawsuit against RealNetworks for violating copyright law in selling its RealDVD software, allowing users to copy DVDs and store them on a harddrive. The DVD Copy Control Association claimed that Real violated the DMCA by circumventing anti-piracy measures ARccOS Protection and RipGuard, as well as breaking Real's licensing agreement with the MPAA's Content Scrambling System."

 

From Stealing is illegal

Is it OK to copy a CD?

 

"Yes, but only if you bought the CD and the copy is for your own personal use. If you purchase a CD, then
for as long as you own that CD
, you are allowed to make and maintain copies of that CD on other media, including CD-Rs, minidiscs, cassette tapes, and even MP3 players. You may NOT, however, use any of those for commercial purposes (including selling them) or give any of them to a friend. That means that you CAN NOT make a copy of a CD for a friend, or likewise copy a friend's CD for your own use, even if it's not for a profit.

 

I would also like to point out I had severe financial problems 7 or so years ago, and I ended up having to sell all of my LPs and SACDs and the equipment to play them to keep from being homeless and living on the streets. I thought I was very smart as I used the Audacity app to record my favorites at 24/96 using the tape loop "analog outs" from my preamp to the analog in on my Mac Mini. However over time, with the help of many kind people here I learned that what I did was morally wrong and illegal because I sold the discs. I have since deleted every single one of these music files, bought a SACD/Blu-ray player and spent several years trying to repurchase my favorite SACDs, as well as new recordings released since then. I have even found many of my favorite LPs reissued as SACDs or high resolution downloads.

 

All of my computer music files are now legal, and I keep the receipts. And since I morally feel I have to keep my physical discs, I just play them on my SACD/Blu-ray player.

 

Jud said "Very little of what you discuss above is legally clear cut." and since he is a lawyer he would know more about this than us. However, to my mind it is morally wrong to keep a copy of something I have sold and no longer own.

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment
Doesn't seem to me that brain surgeons have this problem. Audio engineers and lawyers, yes.

 

Everyone has this problem. Software Engineers and Architects face the same problem, I assure you. Perhaps even more so, since fewer people come into direct contact with them over the course of their lives, compared to lawyers and doctors.

 

(grin)

 

Makes a great "why is it?" though - Why is it people who do not have a clue think they know [my job] better than I do? ;)

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment

The whole ripping/legality thing is tiresome.

How many cases do you know of someone being brought to court for ripping his own CDs for private use - whether he still owns them or not? And I'm not talking about illegal downloads.

 

Come up with one yet?

 

So don't worry about it . The legal status is murky, so each person should just do what he/she thinks is best. There isn't anything else you can do, anyway. And guess what? No matter what you do, NOTHING WILL HAPPEN - as long as it's for personal use and you don't distribute, etc.....

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
The whole ripping/legality thing is tiresome.

How many cases do you know of someone being brought to court for ripping his own CDs for private use - whether he still owns them or not? And I'm not talking about illegal downloads.

 

Come up with one yet?

 

So don't worry about it . The legal status is murky, so each person should just do what he/she thinks is best. There isn't anything else you can do, anyway. And guess what? No matter what you do, NOTHING WILL HAPPEN - as long as it's for personal use and you don't distribute, etc.....

 

While you are probably correct, ignoring any moral issues, there is always the chance things will change...

 

Ford and GM sued for millions over CD-ripping tech in cars | Computerworld

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
While you are probably correct, ignoring any moral issues, there is always the chance things will change...

 

Ford and GM sued for millions over CD-ripping tech in cars | Computerworld

 

Sure, but that's a different issue. It's more about distributing ripping HW, and note that the corporations are being sued, not the individuals. BTW, it's for exactly that reason that the Olive brand rippers/servers have encryption on the rips they produce. Olive is protected itself from possible lawsuits. Looks like they were smart.

 

My problem with discussions of this issue is that it's one of those that gets repeatedly discussed, with the same points being made each time. It should get put in some kind of sticky or FAQ, and everytime it comes up, we should just post a link to the existing thread.

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
This agrees with what I understand in the USA, I don't know about other countries. Over time I've come to understand that it is morally wrong to keep a copy (analog or digital) of a recording that I have sold or gave away. From some of the reading I've done today I also believe it is a violation of copyright laws.

 

* * *

 

From Stealing is illegal

Is it OK to copy a CD?

 

"Yes, but only if you bought the CD and the copy is for your own personal use. If you purchase a CD, then
for as long as you own that CD
, you are allowed to make and maintain copies of that CD on other media, including CD-Rs, minidiscs, cassette tapes, and even MP3 players. You may NOT, however, use any of those for commercial purposes (including selling them) or give any of them to a friend. That means that you CAN NOT make a copy of a CD for a friend, or likewise copy a friend's CD for your own use, even if it's not for a profit.

 

* * *

 

All of my computer music files are now legal, and I keep the receipts. And since I morally feel I have to keep my physical discs, I just play them on my SACD/Blu-ray player.

 

Jud said "Very little of what you discuss above is legally clear cut." and since he is a lawyer he would know more about this than us. However, to my mind it is morally wrong to keep a copy of something I have sold and no longer own.

 

Hi Teresa.

 

Let's talk about the quote from "Stealing is illegal," and then go on to talk about the moral aspect of things.

 

The quote represents the legal position the recording industry takes most of the time. In other words, it is a statement of what the recording industry would like the law to be - again, most of the time (more on that in a minute). The position taken in "Stealing is illegal" is the law in some other countries (many of the nations in the European Union, for instance). However, it is not settled law in the US - in fact, no court has ever specifically issued a ruling taking this position regarding US copyright law. And as I said in a prior note, many US legal commentators are of the opinion that the legality of selling a CD has nothing whatsoever to do with whether you keep a digital copy.

 

Above I mentioned the recording industry takes this position "most of the time." In other words, they are not consistent. In what many people consider the most significant recent court ruling in this area of the law, the recording industry won a case where the court accepted its position that the initial copying of digital content by a consumer who has purchased it is unauthorized and illegal. This was the ReDigi case, where a company set up a business allowing one consumer to sell a digital file to another consumer, and installed software on the seller's computer (with the seller's consent) to confirm that the seller's own copy of the digital file was deleted. So ReDigi made this as much as possible like selling a physical CD, which is legal - after the sale, you no longer had a copy yourself. Notice this would also be right in line with the industry's position in "Stealing is illegal."

 

If ReDigi's business practice was right in line with the recording industry's public position as expressed in "Stealing is illegal," why did they sue ReDigi? Of course it was because they felt this would cut into their own market for sales of downloads. That is the central motivation behind both the position taken in "Stealing is illegal," and the contrary position the industry took in Redigi - the economic interests of the recording companies. The industry felt that telling people they had to get rid of their digital rips when selling their CDs (even though no court had upheld this position) would seem somewhat fair and would be enough of a discouragement to protect the music companies' economic interests. As soon as there was a business model like ReDigi's which the industry felt threatened its economic interests even while complying with the industry's public position, the industry abandoned that position and sued.

 

With regard to the moral aspect: that of course is your own personal business. Just be aware that advertising works (that's why they do it :) ). In material like "Stealing is illegal," the industry not only states authoritatively what is not the law but only its own preferred legal position (most but not all of the time, as we have seen). It also portrays any more consumer-favorable position as immoral - "stealing." This serves exactly the same purpose as its statements about the law: it discourages people from the conduct (selling used CDs) that the industry sees as contrary to its economic interests. Selling one's used CDs has always been perfectly legal, and the recording industry has never liked this. So when the industry saw the possibility that this (in their economic view) undesirable practice could be encouraged if consumers were allowed to rip the content and sell the physical CDs, they rushed to advertise the position that such conduct would be illegal and immoral (and I'm sure they would have tried "fattening" too, if anyone would have believed it).

 

Well, the advertising has worked, hasn't it? Keeping a copy of the rip and selling the CD has become one of those things "everyone knows" is illegal and has become equated with stealing, though no court has ever said so. But when the industry has had a choice of whether to affirm this "moral" position or protect their economic interests by suing, they immediately chose the latter. That should give you a hint about how sincerely held their moral position is. And if they don't believe it - why should you?

 

Of course there *is* a moral dimension to this. Artists deserve to be paid, at least in my view. So I feel we should act accordingly. But I also feel there is a distinction between conduct that deprives artists of significant markets and royalties they would otherwise have had, and the recording industry's desire to wring every last pfennig from the content it hopes to keep control of for eternity.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Of course there *is* a moral dimension to this. Artists deserve to be paid, at least in my view. So I feel we should act accordingly. But I also feel there is a distinction between conduct that deprives artists of significant markets and royalties they would otherwise have had, and the recording industry's desire to wring every last pfennig from the content it hopes to keep control of for eternity.
+1 on both counts

 

A very significant distinction.

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...