Posted on 02/06/2007 9:17:22 AM PST by dbehsman
In its running legal battle against unauthorized downloaders, five recording companies have sued an Augusta man in federal court claiming he illegally pirated and shared copyrighted music.
Scott Hinds, 23, is a defendant in one of a number of lawsuits by Recording Industry of America affiliates seeking to halt illegal sharing of copyrighted songs -- a once-widespread practice some maintain was "fair use," encouraged by certain computer software.
As artists attempt to regain control of their music -- and reap profits from sales -- recording industry spokeswoman Amanda Hunter said 18,000 individuals have been sued in similar lawsuits since September 2003, but Hinds is one of only six defendants in Maine.
(Excerpt) Read more at morningsentinel.mainetoday.com ...
In fact, the music industry is in danger of losing these cases because they can't establish a $750 level of damage and they won't release documents explaining how they arrive at such a figure.
Would you say that a song like "In the Mood" is comparable to , say, a snickers bar?
Nobody needs to "get on the radio" these days. NOT with the internet. My kids don't listen to radio any more. Seriously. It is truly becoming a free market IF you (a music/songwriter/performer) want to do it.
Yeah, the line "everybody ELSE is doing it" just doesn't hold water in my book. Never has for any other stupid, probably illegal behavior of any other kind, either!
I hope that you are correct.
You have some choices here. DON'T listen to the radio. (Quite frankly, I don't at all these days. Most music there is C.r.a.p. in my book.) Don't listen to "cartel" music.
I would love for you to list some examples of what you perceive as decent music.
For me, I need a good melody line with lyrics that move me emotionally. Fun, interesting rhythm in an uptune helps. And I'm all for using interesting vocal harmonies.
You can't refute the laws of economics.
If the RIAA refuses to adapt to the new music paradigm, then incidents like this will only increase.
Fighting this is akin to fighting the War on Drugs.
And yes, that makes us listeners out here instant critics ;-).
I remember thinking a couple of decades ago "who the h@ll would pay money for a POS music like "My Sharona"" [one of THE most annoying songs to my taste EVER ;-], but enough people did to make it profitable for the songwriters.
If I go to the library and check out a CD; is that stealing?
No. That's "fair use" borrowing. (Have you ever heard of the concept of "fair use"?)
If I put the music from the aforementioned borrowed CD onto my MP3 player; is that stealing?
Yes. You are now copying - i.e. duplicating. That's where the infringement comes into play.
If I'm at work listening to my MP3 and a buddy wants to listen too, and so I load the music onto his MP3; is that stealing?
Yes. You are now copying - duplicating - and you are now making your buddy an accessory to the infringement.
My buddy likes the music so much, he decides to burn it onto a CD so that he can listen to it in his car. Is that stealing?
Yes, since he's duplicating already infringed work.
NOW, if your buddy had bought that CD and made one copy for himself on another medium, that is considered acceptable use (typically "fair use" - yet another copyright LAW concept).
Yes, and they have and successfully done so. Napster, Kazaa, etc. How many times have you run into websites that previously linked clips (of works they don't control since they're not the copyright holders on the music) but no longer have them?
The music industry has come up with POWERFUL webcrawler systems that allow it to ID these works and then get the site webmasters to DE-link the works. That's the bottom line.
CD's cost pennies. A single mp3 should not cost more than the CD to put it on. If they were pennies or a quarter each, people would buy in much greater volume.
The music industry and artists just need to find the optimal point on their equivalent Laffur curve to generate the max revenue. If you make it cheap enough that the time invovled in music piracy is not worth it, users will buy the music instead. There's your maximum revenue point.
There 300 million people in this country. If over half of them have PC's and you get just 10% of them downloading the song for a dime or a quarter. That's 150K to 600K. Pretty good wages for a bard.
I am rapidly running out of time to contribute to this thread, so I can be a gainful self-employed person here. I will try to respond late tonight to any responses, comments or questions you may have.
BTW, what songs have you written? Do you have any concept of the "value" of music?
No, it is against uploaders. As the article states, "...he illegally pirated and shared copyrighted music." People forget that every single lawsuit, without exception, involves making copyrighted material available to others. And even then it involves a quantity threashhold.
The comments following the article are a hoot.
I may be wrong but doesn't infringement only come into play when you re-sell the item you duplicated? Private gifting between individuals should be okay.
What if I give my buddy a 'gift' of 10 mp3s, burned off an original CD?
Or, what if I give my buddy the original CD, and keep the 10 mp3s for myself?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.