(from
[url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])


"Recording industry ups ante for downloads

Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal for
someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.

As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs, industry
officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto one's
computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.

The Recording Industry Association of America's position that Howell broke
the law when he copied a legally purchased disc to his computer was
immediately attacked by a lawyer familiar with such charges.

"The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual
physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the
industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your
computer is a violation," said Ray Beckerman, a lawyer who has represented
several of the association's targets in the past.

The Post said the industry's announcement comes in the wake of October's
federal jury case in which a Minnesota woman was ordered to pay $220,000 to
record companies for downloading 24 songs.


© United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any
form."
----------------------------------------------------

Just thought you'd like to know....

jim

jim wrote:[color=blue]
> (from
> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])
>
>
> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>
> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>
> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
> intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal for
> someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.
>
> As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
> Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs, industry
> officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto one's
> computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
>
> The Recording Industry Association of America's position that Howell broke
> the law when he copied a legally purchased disc to his computer was
> immediately attacked by a lawyer familiar with such charges.
>
> "The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual
> physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the
> industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your
> computer is a violation," said Ray Beckerman, a lawyer who has represented
> several of the association's targets in the past.
>
> The Post said the industry's announcement comes in the wake of October's
> federal jury case in which a Minnesota woman was ordered to pay $220,000 to
> record companies for downloading 24 songs.
>
>
> © United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
> This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any
> form."
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Just thought you'd like to know....
>
> jim
>
>[/color]

Please note that this Gestapo crap only happens in the USA. In Europe,
every time we buy a CD or DVD, we are paying an extra fee to pay
royalties and fair use is the golden rule here.

Alias

On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:38:51 -0500, jim wrote:

<snip>
[color=blue]
> Just thought you'd like to know....[/color]

I wonder how much they like me stripping region coding and CSS encryption
from my DVDs so that I can watch them from my Hard Drives and protect the
physical DVDs. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

"Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
news:d7KdnR9tCdCMROHanZ2dnUVZ8vCdnZ2d@giganews.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:38:51 -0500, jim wrote:
>
> <snip>
>[color=green]
>> Just thought you'd like to know....[/color]
>
> I wonder how much they like me stripping region coding and CSS encryption
> from my DVDs so that I can watch them from my Hard Drives and protect the
> physical DVDs. =)[/color]

Watch out or they'll put the MI5 on your trail! Just ask that guy who
posts all over the place. 8^)

Tom Lake

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...[color=blue]
> (from
> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])
>
>
> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>
> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>
> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]

<SNIP>

I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that is
not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
[color=blue]
> Just thought you'd like to know....
>
> jim
>[/color]

Gilgamesh wrote:[color=blue]
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...[color=green]
>> (from
>> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])
>>
>>
>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>
>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>
>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]
>
> <SNIP>
>
> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that is
> not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>[color=green]
>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>
>> jim
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]


That's why they want DRM and everything that goes
with it. A way to get around the law.
Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head
people of the movie industry(can't remember his
name). He said that fair use is no good because
you cannot know ahead of time if the person making
the copy is a pirate or not. So then there should
be no legal way to make copies.
Sounds like greed to me.
caver1

On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:49:38 -0500, caver1 wrote:
[color=blue]
> Gilgamesh wrote:[color=green]
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...[color=darkred]
>>> (from
>>> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/[/url][/color][/color][/color]
recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>
>>>
>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>
>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>
>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]
>>
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let
>> you make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately
>> that is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>
>>> jim
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>>[/color]
>
> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to get
> around the law. Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people
> of the movie industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is
> no good because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the
> copy is a pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make
> copies.
> Sounds like greed to me.[/color]

Sounds like someone that won't be receiving any of my business to me.
Matter of fact, it'll only make it more likely that I'd choose to buy an
illegal copy instead. An illegal copy won't have the restrictions of a
legal copy and would therefore likely be my preferred choice.

Take music for instance. I have all my songs in a huge library on my hard
drive. So if I want to listen to one particular song, I just have to type
in it's name. If I just want to listen to any one random song of one
artist but any album, I can do so too. If I want to listen to any random
song of my collection, which is usually how I have my media player set
up, I can do that as well.

Now let's compare this with what the RIAA and other DRM advocates would
like. They don't want me to copy the music from my CD. I can no longer do
*ANY* of the above. I'm only able to listen to songs that are on the CD
and nothing else.

Listen to a random song I own? Not possible.
Listen to a random song from any one artist (or selection of)? Not
possible.
Quickly find one particular song I'd like to listen to? While it may be
physically possible to locate the CD quickly, it's still a hassle to have
to switch physical media.

Bottom line, I *DON'T* want that. It makes life for me as a consumer more
difficult and reduces my ability to enjoy my content.

Now if I buy illegal copies...

Listen to a random song I own? Possible.
Listen to a random song from any one artist? Possible.
Quickly find one song? Possible.
Do anything else I like? Possible.

So why would anyone, in a DRM world, choose DRM content when non-DRM
content has clear advantages when it comes to actually using the content?

The same goes for movies. I actually have external hard drives that
contain copies of my movies. As I use my computer with a TV attached to
view my movies, this makes it very easy for me to watch any movie I want
which I *legally* own.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

Gilgamesh wrote:[color=blue]
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...[color=green]
>> (from
>> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])
>>
>>
>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>
>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>
>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]
>
> <SNIP>
>
> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that is
> not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>[color=green]
>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>
>> jim
>>[/color]
>[/color]




[url]http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/01/riaa_behaving_b.html[/url]
caver1

as had been reported elsewhere. the individual had the ripped music in a download folder for a P2P program.
that's how they were found.

no where near the same thing as simply copying the music to your computer.




[email]mikeyhsd@sprintpcs.com[/email]



"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
(from
[url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])


"Recording industry ups ante for downloads

Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
intensified its fight against illicit downloading, saying it is illegal for
someone to transfer music from a CD onto a computer.

As part of the industry's ongoing legal effort against Jeffery Howell, a
Scottsdale, Ariz., resident accused of sharing nearly 2,000 songs, industry
officials said even legally owned discs should not be copied onto one's
computer, The Washington Post reported Sunday.

The Recording Industry Association of America's position that Howell broke
the law when he copied a legally purchased disc to his computer was
immediately attacked by a lawyer familiar with such charges.

"The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual
physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the
industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your
computer is a violation," said Ray Beckerman, a lawyer who has represented
several of the association's targets in the past.

The Post said the industry's announcement comes in the wake of October's
federal jury case in which a Minnesota woman was ordered to pay $220,000 to
record companies for downloading 24 songs.


© United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any
form."
----------------------------------------------------

Just thought you'd like to know....

jim

"Gilgamesh" <gilgamesh@spam.me.not> wrote in message
news:13npp4cnmrakac5@corp.supernews.com...[color=blue]
> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media.[/color]

Yes we do, but the RIAA thinks that too should be illegal.

They think that every copy should be separately purchased from them. Want a
backup? - buy another copy. Want it on your IPOD? - buy another copy.
Invite someone over to listen? - buy a "performance license".

Sing "Happy Birthday(c)" to your family, friends and co-workers? The RIAA
wants to hit you will a copyright lawsuit.

CNET did a example in this video podcast:
[url]http://reviews.cnet.com/Buzz_Report_RIAA_thugs_on_your_right/4660-12578_7-6785792.html?tag=vid[/url]

Gilgamesh <gilgamesh@spam.me.not> espoused:[color=blue]
>
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...[color=green]
>> (from
>> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/[/url])
>>
>>
>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>
>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>
>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]
>
><SNIP>
>
> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that is
> not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>[/color]

If its based on England and Wales law, then you will have something
called the "fair deal".

--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: [url]http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/[/url] |
| Cola trolls: [url]http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/[/url] |
| My (new) blog: [url]http://www.thereisnomagic.org[/url] |

"Gilgamesh" <gilgamesh@spam.me.not> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
>make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media.[/color]

It does. The RIAA and MPAA wish it would go away, and tend to act like
it doesn't exist. Electronic books restrict that right too, as well as
the "right of first sale". That's a BIG reason I don't like eBooks.
[color=blue]
> (Unfortunately that is >not part of Australian copyright law :-( )[/color]

Bummer!

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
[email]Slattery_T@bls.gov[/email]
[url]http://members.cox.net/slatteryt[/url]

This appears to be a new policy of the RIAA - and they have not yet had time to update their website. They go into more detail
elsewhere, but here it is from straight from their webpages...

[url]http://www.riaa.com/faq.php[/url]

11. How is downloading music different from copying a personal CD?

Record companies have never objected to someone making a copy of a CD for their own personal use. We want fans to enjoy the music
they bought legally. But both copying CDs to give to friends and downloading music illegally rob the people who created that music
of compensation for their work. When record companies are deprived of critical revenue, they are forced to lay off employees, drop
artists from their rosters, and sign fewer bands. That's bad news for the music industry, but ultimately bad news for fans as well.
We all benefit from a vibrant music industry committed to nurturing the next generation of talent.

On Jan 3, 5:34 am, "Gilgamesh" <gilgam...@spam.me.not> wrote:[color=blue]
> "jim" <j...@home.net> wrote in message
>
> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>[color=green]
> > (from
> >[url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/recording_indus[/url]...)[/color]
>[color=green]
> > "Recording industry ups ante for downloads[/color]
>[color=green]
> > Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM[/color]
>[color=green]
> > SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has[/color]
>
> <SNIP>
>
> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let you
> make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately that is
> not part of Australian copyright law :-( )[/color]

Yes, but I thought I had read somewhere that region coding is illegal
in Australia (that is, the dvd readers sold there play anything,
regardless of region).

Stephan Rose wrote:[color=blue]
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:49:38 -0500, caver1 wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Gilgamesh wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:tH4fj.60869$K27.48242@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>>>> (from
>>>> [url]http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Entertainment/2007/12/30/[/url][/color][/color]
> recording_industry_ups_ante_for_downloads/1429/)[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>
>>>> "Recording industry ups ante for downloads
>>>>
>>>> Published: Dec. 30, 2007 at 3:29 PM
>>>>
>>>> SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., Dec. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. recording industry has
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> I thought US copy right law had something called "Fair Use" that let
>>> you make backup copies of legitimatly purchased media. (Unfortunately
>>> that is not part of Australian copyright law :-( )
>>>
>>>> Just thought you'd like to know....
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>[/color]
>> That's why they want DRM and everything that goes with it. A way to get
>> around the law. Saw an interview yesterday with one of the head people
>> of the movie industry(can't remember his name). He said that fair use is
>> no good because you cannot know ahead of time if the person making the
>> copy is a pirate or not. So then there should be no legal way to make
>> copies.
>> Sounds like greed to me.[/color]
>
> Sounds like someone that won't be receiving any of my business to me.
> Matter of fact, it'll only make it more likely that I'd choose to buy an
> illegal copy instead. An illegal copy won't have the restrictions of a
> legal copy and would therefore likely be my preferred choice.
>
> Take music for instance. I have all my songs in a huge library on my hard
> drive. So if I want to listen to one particular song, I just have to type
> in it's name. If I just want to listen to any one random song of one
> artist but any album, I can do so too. If I want to listen to any random
> song of my collection, which is usually how I have my media player set
> up, I can do that as well.
>
> Now let's compare this with what the RIAA and other DRM advocates would
> like. They don't want me to copy the music from my CD. I can no longer do
> *ANY* of the above. I'm only able to listen to songs that are on the CD
> and nothing else.
>
> Listen to a random song I own? Not possible.
> Listen to a random song from any one artist (or selection of)? Not
> possible.
> Quickly find one particular song I'd like to listen to? While it may be
> physically possible to locate the CD quickly, it's still a hassle to have
> to switch physical media.
>
> Bottom line, I *DON'T* want that. It makes life for me as a consumer more
> difficult and reduces my ability to enjoy my content.
>
> Now if I buy illegal copies...
>
> Listen to a random song I own? Possible.
> Listen to a random song from any one artist? Possible.
> Quickly find one song? Possible.
> Do anything else I like? Possible.
>
> So why would anyone, in a DRM world, choose DRM content when non-DRM
> content has clear advantages when it comes to actually using the content?
>
> The same goes for movies. I actually have external hard drives that
> contain copies of my movies. As I use my computer with a TV attached to
> view my movies, this makes it very easy for me to watch any movie I want
> which I *legally* own.
>[/color]


MS sympathizers try to place all the blame on the
movie and recording industry. But what they don't
want to realize is that the movie and recording
industry is taking their business plan directly
from MS. You own nothing. Everything by license or
subscription. Always paying.
This is why most intelligent people are fighting them.
I agree with copywrite protection but there must
be limits.
caver1