Coping Audio CD's & DVD's

[Elephant]

Isn't it legal to make a copy of an audio CD or DVD and give it to a friend as a gift?

[2COOL]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
Isn't it legal to make a copy of an audio CD or DVD and give it to a friend as a gift? No. On a similar note, if you uploaded a full copyright CD/DVD unto the internet so that your friend can download and burn his "gift" for free...now, is that legal? No.

[Elephant]

I disagree.

It seems to me that when recordable casettes first appeared in the 70's the record companies wanted to make them illegal. Instead they settled for a small royalty on all blank casettes. Didn't the same thing happen when VCR's CDR's first came out? That's what I have heard.

If nothing is being charged for the copy then there is no copyright infringement. Yes or No?

By the way is there a spell checker for this forum? I'm new.

[fccHandler]

Well, what if you make another copy to give to another friend? Then let's say you make 10 copies to give to your co-workers. At some level it will become the same as sharing it on P2P.

Supposedly you can make a backup copy just for yourself (that's part of what Doom9's site is about), but legally you aren't entitled to "distribute" the copyrighted content to anyone, even if it's just one friend and no money is exchanged.

If you want to give a copy to your friend AND keep one for yourself, by law the proper thing to do is to purchase two copies of the CD.

P.S. There's no spull chicker.

[DDogg]

http://www.iespell.com/download.php

[Elephant]

It was legal to copy video tapes to give to friends wasn't it? I know with casettes it was never an issue.

[Elephant]

DDogg,

Thanks, I will check it out. Does it work for this forum?

Here's one that works if you have MS Word. I use it in another forum that is powered by "V Bulletin" (same as this one I believe). But, it won't work here for some reason.

http://www.dynawares.com/

[Elephant]

Originally posted by fccHandler
Well, what if you make another copy to give to another friend? Then let's say you make 10 copies to give to your co-workers. At some level it will become the same as sharing it on P2P.



That is my point... it is no different than p2p. P2p is easier, of course!

It used to be legal to give people copies of casettes... now it's not?

[fccHandler]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
That is my point... it is no different than p2p. P2p is easier, of course!
Errm, sharing copyrighted stuff on P2P is also illegal in case you haven't heard. As we speak, hundreds of U.S. citizens are being threatened with lawsuits and outrageous fines for that. Your scenario isn't really any different except for the scale of the crime.

It just isn't legal to give away copies of copyrighted material, whether it's cassettes, VHS, CD, or DVD. And I don't think it was ever legal to share copied cassettes or vinyl records. Back in the day, those copies were called "bootlegs," and the people who made them were hassled by the authorities too.

[Elephant]

I believe sharing cassettes was legal in the 70's because the record companies received a small percentage of sales of all blank media. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I remember people complaining about the fact that the greedy record companies were making money on your cassette even if it was being used to record a conference.

How about this scenario: 2 or say 3 people buy a CD together. Is that illegal? I don't think so. Shouldn't they be allowed to make backup copies for their own use?

When I buy a CD I should be able to make a copy of it for my wife to listen to it in her car? How about my son? We paid for the music shouldn't we be able to listen to it.

I guess my point of view would be different if the RIAA wasn't so greedy, not to mention all the garbage they put out and the way they control the limited amount of music on the air waves. There is so much good music that they stifle... it is really sad.

Hopefully their greed will get them in the end when the song writers will realize that they don't need the record companies and go direct to the public thru downloads. Then, the artist would receive the percentage they deserve! Not the ridiculously small amount they receive now!

[fccHandler]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
How about this scenario: 2 or say 3 people buy a CD together. Is that illegal? I don't think so. Shouldn't they be allowed to make backup copies for their own use?

When I buy a CD I should be able to make a copy of it for my wife to listen to it in her car? How about my son? We paid for the music shouldn't we be able to listen to it.
Those are both excellent questions. Does "fair use" extend to making copies for members of your family? And what are the rights of 2 or 3 people combining their money to buy a CD? (Let's hope prices don't go so high that it comes to that!) :scared:

[Elephant]

This just sort of came to me.

In ancient days... a guy has an idea. He makes a wheel. Some body else sees it. Do they have to ask the inventors permission to make one for their own use? Maybe the inventor should have kept it a secret so nobody could copy it.

In IMHO, once the info is out, it fair game to anyone. If you don't want anyone to use your idea, then keep it to yourself. Copyright only serves the greed & selfishness of humans. It's not right. It is against the natural laws of competition.

I don't know... it just seems to go against the natural order of things... “You can't do that because I said so”. But, you no what... if I know how to do it, then I can! I'm not going to pay you for your wheel idea. You shouldn't have let me see it if you didn't want me to copy it.

Who's to say I can’t... unfortunately it is the law. But, it's not right.


Greed is not good. You thought it up… great! Share it. It will come back to you. You want to get paid for it… then keep it a secret. You can sell the secret to somebody. Once it’s out in the open… sorry it public info and that’s the way it should be.

Obviously, it’s not this simple. There is the other side of the coin to argue.

Just a few thoughts. ;)

[fccHandler]

If the inventor keeps his wheel a secret, how will he profit from it? We live in a capitalist society, which (among other things) means that you have the right to create stuff and profit by selling your creations. Essentially, copyright law exists to protect you from the bad people (pirates) stealing your ideas and selling them for their own profit. Even if the pirates just share your stuff and don't profit from it, it can hurt your business because lots of people will get your stuff for free, and you won't see a dime from that.

What will happen to creativity and the "American dream" if people can no longer profit from the stuff they create?

[Dimmer]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
It seems to me that when recordable casettes first appeared in the 70's the record companies wanted to make them illegal. Instead they settled for a small royalty on all blank casettes. Didn't the same thing happen when VCR's CDR's first came out? That's what I have heard.That's true. In Canada, several large companies founded Coalition for Fair Digital Access (http://www.ccfda.ca/subsections/eng_whoweare.html) to fight against the levies on blank digital media. The members include large retailers like Costco, Radio Shack and Wal-Mart, along with high-tech companies like Intel, Apple and AMD. I think there is no levy on recordable DVD yet, but it's being considered. As far as I know, every CD-R "for audio" is considered to be used for copyright violation, and taxed appropriately.

I suppose the audiocassettes and VCRs are not much of an issue at least today, because the analogue copy is always a bit worse than the original. Digital media, on the other hand, allows to create perfect copies, and of course it's bothering copyright holders.

However, as it's been noted above, Hollywood doesn't seem to be in any financial trouble nowadays. I'm pretty sure the piracy issue is highly exaggerated nowadays in mass media, and the greed of the movie companies is certainly the factor since they have enough money to control the media.

[Elephant]

Originally posted by fccHandler
If the inventor keeps his wheel a secret, how will he profit from it?

Well, there’s the other side of the coin! And... well said too I might say.

The inventor doesn't profit from it. He shares it. People will still keep inventing. How did the world ever get along before copyright came along... very nicely with less legal fees!

Do you think this is getting off topic or is this conversation OK? From what I have read in this forum, they are pretty strick about rules.

[Elephant]

Dimmer,

If a royalty is paid, then I should be able to do what ever I want with the copy as long as I don't sell it. True or false?

Also is that only on the CDRs for audio. I think that's where I heard that info... when I asked the sales person what the difference was between regular CDRs and the CDRs for audio. He said that there was no difference except something about the royalty... I think... can't really remember that well.

[Dimmer]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
If a royalty is paid, then I should be able to do what ever I want with the copy as long as I don't sell it. True or false?While its true from a common sense point of view, the law in different countries treats this differently. You may notice it especially in software licensing. Although you think you bought the software and it's yours, the license might say that you only paid for the right of using that software in a certain way (only on 1 PC), but the manufacturer is still the owner of the intellectual property. Also is that only on the CDRs for audio. I think that's where I heard that info... when I asked the sales person what the difference was between regular CDRs and the CDRs for audio. He said that there was no difference except something about the royalty... I think... can't really remember that well.CDR for audio are crippled in a special way so they can be only used in standalone recorders and won't record digital content flagged as copyrighted. So that's a total waste of money. Still, there is a levy on CDR for data, too. Who knows, maybe soon they'll come up with special more expensive DVDR for standalone DVD recorders that won't record pay-per-view or other selective programming.

[Elephant]

I didn't know there was any license agreement with audio CDs, is there? What is the levy for if you can't give a copy to your friends?

[Dimmer]

Originally posted by Todd Smith
I didn't know there was any license agreement with audio CDs, is there? What is the levy for if you can't give a copy to your friends?Well, they don't put license agreement in audio CD boxes (yet?), they just put copyright notice on the jacket, but the idea still remains the same that you don't own the music on the CD, you pay only to be allowed to listen to it.

When you give a copy to your friends, you have to buy a blank CDR first to make the copy and therefore pay the levy again. In a way, this would actually confirm that every CD you buy is for pirating and should be taxed appropriately.

[Elephant]

So what is the consensus? Is it legal to copy an Audio CD that you own and give it to a friend?

[GWD]

Originally posted by Elephant
So what is the consensus? Is it legal to copy an Audio CD that you own and give it to a friend?

Essentially 'no', but you can obtain permission from the artist/record company/other stakeholder to do so. This is under the terms and conditions that they set, and you may have trouble getting that permission... as in actually speaking to the right person and getting their written consent. With independant music artists, this is actually much easier to do, as you can usually talk to the artist/manager/whatever at the gigs if you really try. It's the big labels that are more challenging to accomplish this with.

In the respect of pooling money to purchase an audio CD, technically you're entering into a verbal contract with the other money poolers to an equal share in the CD, unless you all have agreed to a different term. That means you can pass the CD amongst the contract members to an equal share of use determined in the verbal contract, but you can't copy it without the permission mentioned earlier.

Australia doesn't have the 'fair use' concept anywhere in its constitution...yet (will it ever??? We do everything else so Americanly, so why not this? :p)... for audio/video distribution. For software, it exists in part, as there appears to be discussions/arguments on how much and what software it should cover. Even then, it's for personal backups only, not gifts for friends :D

Hope that at least gives you a part answer!

GWD

[Elephant]

Thanks GDW,

Good info... but not really what I wanted to hear.

Quote from dimmer: "That's true. In Canada, several large companies founded Coalition for Fair Digital Access to fight against the levies on blank digital media. The members include large retailers like Costco, Radio Shack and Wal-Mart, along with high-tech companies like Intel, Apple and AMD. I think there is no levy on recordable DVD yet, but it's being considered. As far as I know, every CD-R "for audio" is considered to be used for copyright violation, and taxed appropriately."


IMHO... I am of the opinion that if a tax is paid to the RIAA on every blank CDR (see "dimmers" 1st post in this thread above)then we should be able to share with friends just as it was legal to do with cassettes in the 70's... if you were around back then you will remember that. As long as you didn't sell the copies it was legal. (contrary to what "2cool" & "fccHandler" think. The RIAA made money on every blank cassette even if it was use for recording a business conference.

I'm not sure if the RIAA gets money from every blank CDR here in the States, but I think they do on blank "audio CDRs). Ever wonder what the difference was between "CDRs" and "audio CDRs"? I believe it's the levy for the RIAA. It's not that they record better! At least that is what I'm trying to figure out.

I think most people think that it is illegal to distribute copied audio CDs. That is what the RIAA would like you to think. But then... what’s the tax for? :)

[fccHandler]

Originally posted by Elephant
we should be able to share with friends just as it was legal to do with cassettes in the 70's... if you were around back then you will remember that. As long as you didn't sell the copies it was legal. (contrary to what "2cool" & "fccHandler" think.
I remember the 70's fondly, and sharing cassettes wasn't legal then, nor has it ever been legal AFAIK. It's just that the impact in those days was so insignificant that it wasn't worth anyone's effort to go after you. But today, millions of people are sharing and downloading via P2P, and the stakes are much higher.

[Elephant]

Originally posted by fccHandler
I remember the 70's fondly...

Somehow you have forgotten, or maybe never knew, about the cassette levy/royalty? Are you so sure about your info? Maybe some research is in order. What about "dimmer's" post? What is the levy on CDRs for? I don't think that they would just give the RIAA money out of the goodness of their hearts do you? Although I'm sure the RIAA is almost capable of persuading them to!

[Elephant]

Maybe this will help you understand:

http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/46643

[fccHandler]

Well, I'll admit this discussion is way out of my league. But are you suggesting that the levy/royalty on cassettes and CDs gives you the legal right to distribute copyrighted material in that form? Somehow I doubt that.

P.S. What we need here is a copyright lawyer. :D

[Elephant]

fccHandler.

I'm not really sure... I'm trying to figure it out... doing some searches right now. But the RIAA does get money from every "Audio CDR." I'm not exactly sure what that money is for though... I will keep searching.

[Elephant]

Jackpot!

Check out the 3rd post down!

http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2/46643

[Elephant]

The Audio Home Recording Act

In 1992, Congress passed the Audio Home Recording Act ("AHRA"), an amendment to the federal copyright law. Under the AHRA, all digital recording devices must incorporate a Serial Copy Management System ("SCMS"). This system allows digital recorders to make a first-generation copy of a digitally recorded work, but does not allow a second-generation copy to be made from the first copy (users may still make as many first-generation copies as they want). The AHRA also provides for a royalty tax of up to $8 per new digital recording machine and 3 percent of the price of all digital audiotapes or discs. This tax is paid by the manufacturers of digital media devices and distributed to the copyright owners whose music is presumably being copied. In consideration of this tax, copyright owners agree to forever waive the right to claim copyright infringement against consumers using audio recording devices in their homes. This is commensurate with the fair use exception to copyright law, which allows consumers to make copies of copyrighted music for non-commercial purposes.The SCMS and royalty requirements apply only to digital audio recording devices. Because computers are not digital audio recording devices, they are not required to comply with Serial Copy Management System requirement.

[Doom9]

it essentially boils down to the questions "where are you from" and "would you find a judge favorable to your case".

Copyright laws vary widely in between different countries. In my case, making a copy for a familiy member is perfectly acceptable. When it comes to friends, it depends. The law allows for some kind of distribution to friends, but does not give a clear definition of friend, and how far you can go with it. Thus, if you give someone that spends half of his life in your house anyway, a copy, that would probably be deemed okay (but a court would have to rule on it for you to be sure, as I said, the law is somewhat ambiguous in that area). However, if you start handing out CDs at the office, or at school, that would most certainly not be okay. And if you claim that you have 50 very close friends you want to share a CD with, I suspect you wouldn't get away with it either.

So, I'm afraid this question cannot be universally answered, and even if your country's copyright law has some provisions for it, if it's about friends you most certainly will have to go to court to make sure what you're doing is legal (or to find out it is not).

[Elephant]

Not according to this 1992 law. In the U.S.A you can do any thing you with it... I think?

"...copyright owners agree to forever waive the right to claim copyright infringement against consumers using audio recording devices in their homes."

[Elephant]

We aren't giving the good old RIAA money just to make a backup copy are we?

[fccHandler]

Originally posted by Elephant
In 1992, Congress passed the Audio Home Recording Act ("AHRA")
Very interesting, but it almost sounds like a bad joke:

Under the AHRA, all digital recording devices must incorporate a Serial Copy Management System ("SCMS"). This system allows digital recorders to make a first-generation copy of a digitally recorded work, but does not allow a second-generation copy to be made from the first copy (users may still make as many first-generation copies as they want).
:confused: Since when?

The SCMS and royalty requirements apply only to digital audio recording devices. Because computers are not digital audio recording devices, they are not required to comply with Serial Copy Management System requirement.
:confused: If computers are not recording devices, then what IS a "digital audio recording device"? From the way I'm reading this, if you are using your PC to make digital copies then this law doesn't apply in your situation.

[Elephant]

This law was set up in 1992 and directed towards the first generation of audio cd recorders which would not function with data cdrs... they had to use the audio cdrs. The RIAA wasn't thinking that the prices and technology were going to change so much. They wish that they never agreed to it and are trying to change that law now. But it is still on the books.

As far as I can tell, it's only legal to make copies on to an "Audio CD" which the RIAA receives a royalty. But you can do any thing you want with it… except sell it.

At any rate… the RIAA has never sued anyone for making copies on non "Audio CDRs" and giving them away. I don’t think they are worried about that because of the physical nature of distribution. But, the internet, that’s a whole other issue and we know where they stand on that.

IMHO

What their greed is not letting them see is that they are going to make the same amount of money if they would just let people download songs for 10 cents a song because people would download more songs. People only have so much they can spend on music/videos. They need to adapt.

The problem with the new Napster and I tunes is the variety of music. The great thing about P2P was that you could get music that the record companies decided wasn't worth offering to the public. they could make a fortune if they would catalogue rare old music and let people download it for 10 cents a song.

In the end if the RIAA doesn’t adapt the will go out of business because the artist don’t need them any more to distribute there music. The artist can do it him/herself now and if they only charged 5 cents a song then they would still be making twice as much as the record company scum gives them now. :)

[Elephant]

So... it looks like you can legally make an "Audio CDR" copy of a copyrighted music CD (in the USA & Canada anyway) and give it to your friends. Would everybody agree with that after reading about the AHRA of 1992? (See above posts)

Bet you most people didn't know that the RIAA get royalties from the sale of every blank "Audio Type", (not "Data Type") CDR.

Opinions anyone?

[fccHandler]

I still don't agree, but like Doom9 said, ultimately it depends on where you live and who is judging your case. I understand your argument, but without the advice of a lawyer I just have to follow my gut instinct, and my instinct says it's still a violation of copyright law (which I suspect outweighs the AHRA) to do what you are proposing.

Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure you can get away with it as long as you and your friends don't blab to everyone. :p

Regards,
fccHandler

[Elephant]

If you do a search and study on the AHRA you will see that it is legislature that was created by our government and it is still on the books and it is the law. The RIAA is not getting money for nothing. They distribute the money to the artist... read up on it and you will see.:)

P.S. It's not a matter of getting away with it. If you want to spend the extra money to buy the "Audio Type" CDRs then it's legal. (in the USA)

[Elephant]

This is mis-information!

Originally posted by fccHandler
...and sharing cassettes wasn't legal then, nor has it ever been legal AFAIK. It's just that the impact in those days was so insignificant that it wasn't worth anyone's effort to go after you.

The above info is not correct! :)

This info is correct:

"This tax is paid by the manufacturers of digital media devices and distributed to the copyright owners whose music is presumably being copied. In consideration of this tax, copyright owners agree to forever waive the right to claim copyright infringement against consumers using audio recording devices in their homes."

[fccHandler]

:confused:

I fail to see how the AHRA created in 1992 affects cassette trading in the 1970's (that's what my quote was in reference to)...

[Elephant]

fcchandler,

I’m sorry, my error! You are absolutely right. The ARHA has nothing to do with the recording of cassettes.

However similar legislation was passed in the 70's on the cassette issue to appease the RIAA. So, with all do respect, your statement about it being illegal to record copyrighted music on to cassettes is not true. And, it is still legal, to this day, to do so.

[Doom9]

SCMS is really old news. It's actually quite a fair system, permitting as many copies from the original as you want, but taking the possibility to make 2nd gen copies away (something which you can't do with computers).

However, nothing in the ARHA says it outweighs the copyright act. Thus, what is certainly the case for private copying with limited distribution (e.g. your own families) might not be true when it comes to an extended friends circle (so essentially we're back where I started out to). These days, there are taxes even on data CDs, and DVDs in some countries, so using non-audio CDs should no longer pose a problem either (we have ridiculously high taxes on DVDs around here, the tax per disc is about as high as a 8x Ritek disc on the net (thus I bet many people from my country are ordering their DVDs abroad these days).

[Elephant]

Originally posted by Doom9
These days, there are taxes even on data CDs, and DVDs in some countries, so using non-audio CDs should no longer pose a problem either (we have ridiculously high taxes on DVDs around here, the tax per disc is about as high as a 8x Ritek disc on the net (thus I bet many people from my country are ordering their DVDs abroad these days).

What is the tax for?

[Doom9]

What is the tax for?Same thing taxes on audio CD-Rs, Mini Discs, DAT tapes, audio and video cassettes is for. To compensate copyright owners for losses incurred through private copying. But private copying as defined by copyright law allows for... well.. what I mentioned in my last two posts. It is not clearly defined if it includes friends, and how far the friend circle can go.

[Elephant]

Thanks Doom9 :)

[Mug Funky]

i'd consider it (very) petty theft.

the levy is designed to cover small-scale piracy such as this, but only as a means of breaking even. they're not saying "please make copies for your friends", rather they're tacitly cutting the rather small losses incurred from the small number of people that do this.

in the case of 2-3 people buying the same CD, i suppose they could be treated as 1 entity rather than 3 people. then they have the same right to the media as a regular person (and they have to decide who gets the original and who gets the copies... resulting in an amusing encounter in a treehouse where they can't agree, fight, tie each other up, and catch colds)

[Elephant]

Originally posted by Mug Funky
i'd consider it (very) petty theft.

the levy is designed to cover small-scale piracy such as this, but only as a means of breaking even. they're not saying "please make copies for your friends", rather they're tacitly cutting the rather small losses incurred from the small number of people that do this.



Thanks for the reply,

That is interesting info!

So, if they are going to tax us for something we're not supposed to do, but they assume that we are going to do it, then it would seem that we have paid to do it there for we should be able to do it, even though technically it is considered illegal to make copies of DVDs and give them to friends.:confused: :confused: :confused:

Go figure!