Conveyor Belt
12-31-2007, 09:16 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html
ow, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.
The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings.
"I couldn't believe it when I read that," says Ray Beckerman, a New York lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA. "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."
What? Are you kidding me? What do they want? Next they'll be saying that the copy on my MP3 player has to be different than the copy on my computer... or did they say that already? After all, it is a 'copy'. A copy is a copy in my opinion. You can't say one copy is legal and one is illegal.
The article has it right. People are looking out for smaller labels and better music so they don't have to put up with the big record company hassle.
ow, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.
The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings.
"I couldn't believe it when I read that," says Ray Beckerman, a New York lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA. "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."
What? Are you kidding me? What do they want? Next they'll be saying that the copy on my MP3 player has to be different than the copy on my computer... or did they say that already? After all, it is a 'copy'. A copy is a copy in my opinion. You can't say one copy is legal and one is illegal.
The article has it right. People are looking out for smaller labels and better music so they don't have to put up with the big record company hassle.