Most Popular
| Top Stories | Commented | Featured |
Tech Tip of the Week: A List of PC Game Classics Available Free of Charge featured
Sony demos its motion controller, the PlayStation Move
ComScore: Android usage soars, iPhone stalls, Windows Mobile dives
Free wireless broadband access coming to the US?
OnLive launching in June, starts at $14.95 per month
ARM: Over 50 tablet devices will debut in 2010
TechSpot RSSIndustry News
Ripping CDs is still theft, says RIAA
It is no big secret that the RIAA hates people who use music in any fashion they don't approve of. They opposed personal media players, they opposed digital downloads and in the past they have opposed ripping your own CDs. As a matter of fact, they still oppose it. As a recent court case is demonstrating, the RIAA is willing to attack people who rip their own music, claiming that making mp3s from your own CDs is “unauthorized”.
Whether or not someone chooses to share that music, it shouldn't be up to the RIAA, or anyone for that matter, to tell you what you can and cannot do with a CD. It goes to show how archaic that organization has become, and how out of touch with reality they are. Apple has rebuilt their empire largely in part to people dumping CDs, Microsoft builds tools to do such right into their OS and there is a never-ending list of programs and suites intended to make such operations easy.
While they may have other grounds with which to attack these particular people on, relying on “ripping music is stealing” is a shot in the dark.
Whether or not someone chooses to share that music, it shouldn't be up to the RIAA, or anyone for that matter, to tell you what you can and cannot do with a CD. It goes to show how archaic that organization has become, and how out of touch with reality they are. Apple has rebuilt their empire largely in part to people dumping CDs, Microsoft builds tools to do such right into their OS and there is a never-ending list of programs and suites intended to make such operations easy.
While they may have other grounds with which to attack these particular people on, relying on “ripping music is stealing” is a shot in the dark.
Related Stories
User Comments (10)
Post a comment| canadian on December 11, 2007 11:58 AM | Seriously, something has to be done to stop the RIAA. What
could be done, short of revolution?
|
| windmill007 on December 11, 2007 1:03 PM | Don't worry they will go down with there sinking ship. They
can sue all they want..In the end they will fail and have to
convert to the new way of doing business. I haven't bought a
cd in years. Everything I do is with 320K VBR. That is the
best sounding smallest size! Wake up ITUNES...Amazon is
closest but need to up from 256 VBR. I'm glad there is
mp3sparks. It allows you to make any format you want at a
reasonable cost. I actually stopped useing P2P and paying at
this site. To bad its not one of RIAA models. WAKE UP RIAA!
Or risk losing us all to places that give us what we want!
|
| greenman on December 11, 2007 1:27 PM | I'm not sure RIAA really supports what the artists want
anymore. I'm curious how much of the royalty money collected
really gets into the hands of the artists. Is this a case of
greed on the part of administrators of RIAA, or are the
artists themselves complaining? I do know this much: One of
my forbears helped start the RIAA. The royalty system was
set up in the early 1900's to give starving musicians and
music writers a way to keep a roof above their heads and so
that large recording companies couldn't just steal their
work out from under them and use it to their own purposes.
It's been twisted considerably since then. Many artists
don't get much if anything from their royalties because of
'production' costs they are supposed to pay. The record
companies screw them out of a right and honorable wage for
their living with paperwork - virtual contract slavery. So
is the RIAA helping artists or record companies? I think
it's the record companies and not the artists. So RIAA is
serving exactly the opposite purpose that it originally
served - using the artists' money against them. This is
wrong-headed. If it's not performing the original function
correctly today, we need a new system that *does* support
artists for *their* work. It should be started by artists,
for artists and represent artists alone and not
mega-recording companies. What can we do to really support
artists where the RIAA is failing? Create artist-owned
recording studios that charge a set and fixed reasonable
cost for recording new artists. Create an open-source legal
documentation website that all artists can use as
boiler-plate for reasonable and just contracts with would-be
distrubutors, agents and gigs. Set up a new royalty
distribution situation putting residuals in the hands of the
artists and not the companies that supposedly 'represent'
them. There have to be a million ways it could be done
better than the RIAA.
|
| phantasm66 on December 12, 2007 5:50 AM | Originally posted by windmill007: Don't
worry they will go down with there sinking ship. They can
sue all they want..In the end they will fail and have to
convert to the new way of doing business. I haven't bought a
cd in years. Everything I do is with 320K VBR. That is the
best sounding smallest size! Wake up ITUNES...Amazon is
closest but need to up from 256 VBR. I'm glad there is
mp3sparks. It allows you to make any format you want at a
reasonable cost. I actually stopped useing P2P and paying at
this site. To bad its not one of RIAA models. WAKE UP RIAA!
Or risk losing us all to places that give us what we
want! That's a good post. The truth is, the RIAA are
indeed fighting a loosing battle. Their old model is gone.
Their huge profits will soon be a thing of the past.
Artists will turn from them when the new way of doing things
is properly established. It will take a few years still,
but its well on its way.
|
| papercut_2008 on December 12, 2007 10:22 PM | So, I'm writing a term paper on piracy right now, and as I'm
doing research, I keep thinking "wow, these guys (the RIAA)
are scumbags. Suing dead people, and people who don't have
a computer? Wow. So I decide that I want to ask the RIAA
what gives, and I surf over to their site to find contact
info. None there. *GASP*... I'm choking on irony right
now... these guys are mercilessly tracking people down, and
finding new reasons to sue, but won't even give us a contact
e-mail or phone number? That says it all.
|
| captaincranky on December 14, 2007 8:40 PM | It's heartwarming to know that even if you have no skills
that could possibly benefit mankind, you can still get a job
as a lawyer for the RIAA.
|
| dlptir78345 on December 15, 2007 11:35 AM | RIAA is as one of the posters stated "scumbags". They are
the proverable kettle calling the pot black! Not only does
the RIAA NOT provide a decent return to the Artist, they
overcharge for their services. It is impossible for the cost
of "production" to be much today. Many people have recording
studios in their homes that are twice as good as the RIAA
studios of the past. With the easy availability of good
quality microphones, recorders, and the knowledge present on
the web, there is no need for an RIAA going forward.
Hopefully when their funds decrease sufficiently they will
not be able to afford to pay their lawyers. The other hope
is that the judges start throwing their cases out of court.
Remember we can legislate the RIAA out of business by having
Congress create the appropriate law rather than waiting for
the courts or time to solve the current stupidity being
displayed by the RIAA.
|
| Mictlantecuhtli on December 17, 2007 5:40 AM | Doesn't United States have any kind of "fair use" laws?
|
| bushwhacker on December 17, 2007 5:30 PM | And I'm not even surprised that RIAA won't even lets us just
burn the CDs as back up for our own uses.
|
| captaincranky on December 17, 2007 11:40 PM | Originally posted by
Mictlantecuhtli: Doesn't United States have
any kind of "fair use" laws? From what I think I
understand we do, but it's a catch 22. Allegedly we can make
back-up copies of a disc that we own. However, it's illegal
for us to contravene copy protection. This leaves you
breaking the law while making the copy you're entitled to
make.The RIAA simply decides summarily to re-legislate or re-adjudicate the issue anytime they feel so disposed. Basically, they decide what they think the law should be, and move forward claiming that that's the way it is. Even if they lose, they could just move on to another Federal Appeals Court Circuit and start the SOS all over again. [Edited by captaincranky on 2007-12-17 23:44:12]
|
