Karaoke Forums

Scenario -

You are on eBay/Craigslist and you find a killer deal on a mobile DJ rig. It is clearly stated that it comes loaded with <insert obscenely large number here> DJ and Karaoke tracks.

If you buy this system knowing that there is stolen music on it, is there any liability to the purchaser?

The key being that it is advertised with it and the purchasers knows it is there before hand.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

It would be no different than buying stolen goods. It doesn't matter whether you knew or not, you can be on the hook. Usually, if you're an innocent dupe the stolen property is seized and you have learned an important lesson, always check what you are buying. Remember, buyer beware. If you bought it knowing it was stolen, then you can be charged with receiving stolen property.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

you have liability if you use the music pre-loaded on the drive for commercial use. I do know of 2 hosts in my little part of the world that snapped up a couple of these systems (complete with hardware and the software)very cheap and just wiped the drives and loaded the music they owned. I just missed out on a really sweet complete system I would have loved to do that with....would have been much lighter to carry than "my current system" The whole system was selling for less than I could buy the Bose stacks and bass units for used.

_________________
"Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain."
Unknown
"if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters."
Lee McGuffey

That sounds to me like a rhetorical question... Of course it's the purchaser's liability, too.

I posted it because I was curious. If I purchase a car from someone and I know they stole it, then I can certainly get into some serious trouble. But a car can't be deleted and made unstolen.

Digital media can be scrubbed, but that doesn'y absolve the purchaser from buying stolen property in the first place.

I imagine that since piracy is a relative low priority for authorities compared to other types of stolen property transactions, that purchasing DJ rigs with all the music pre-loaded just doesn't get the attention it deserves.

I also asked because there are a few rigs I have found that I have wanted to buy but passed up on because I didn't want to run afoul of anyone because I knew up front. I have taken to asking people to drop the price if they will delete the music. Every single person has said no so far. I find that interesting because most of the ads boast about the large amount of music as a value ad for the sale and many say they have spend thousands of dollars over years to acquire the music. But when asked to delete or sell without the music and drop the price, they always refuse. Pretty clear to me they have no skin in the game.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Well, I guess if you're responsible enough to delete the illegal music there's no problem.

If we're talking about the letter of the law, Receiving stolen property is proscribed by federal statute (18 U.S.C.A. § 662) and is a Federal crime. This would fall under Federal jurisdiction, I believe, because the content came from several sources across several state lines. So the real answer...the legal one...is that if you knowingly purchase a system which contains illegal music, you are responsible for receiving stolen goods and this is a Federal charge potentially punishable by jail.

Chris, didn't you say you bought a system with a totally loaded hard drive? I'm sure I read that somewhere. Sounds like you wiped it and loaded your legal music, but even in that event if you knew it was loaded with illegal product, you are, in fact, guilty of receiving stolen goods. At the very least, even if you didn't know at the time you purchased it, you should have reported it once you realized that it contained stolen tracks. It does look like you knew, though.

Just to make sure I was being fair and accurate, I found this previous post from the thread called "Re: Stellar Records / Pop Hits Monthly and their C.A.P. Prog"



Just to be clear -- I'm not trying to attack you. There are just so many questions about what constitutes legality, and there is a great deal of grey area. However, some things are quite clear.

_________________
Birdofsong

@birdofsong - From the opening post of the same thread you grabbed that quote from -



In short, I thought I was buying a legal system. I found out afterwards it was not legal and did report it to local authorities. They weren't very interested.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Did those authorities advise you to go ahead and use those tracks? Or give you any advice on where to turn for further action?

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

@earthling - hehe That gave me a chuckle. Imagine a police officer taking a statement from me regarding the piracy of karaoke music. The primary complaint to the police was about theft because I did not receive was what I paid for. We didn't get into the fineries of karaoke piracy.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

The statute you cite is limited to the "special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States," which is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 7 and means the high seas, federal land reservations, and other similar areas that are not under the jurisdiction of any state or territory. It does not apply to the fact pattern given.

That being said, I have never met a prosecuting attorney, state or federal, that regarded the sale of articles containing pirated music to be a "theft" of that music. Under the laws of most states, larceny requires that a tangible item be taken with the intent to deprive its owner of possession. Unless the hard drive and other equipment itself is stolen, what has been described is not "receiving stolen property." It may be a criminal act, but not on the basis of the larceny statutes.

If you haven’t yet destroyed the evidence, you could pursue a civil case against that seller for fraud. If you prevail in your argument you could also get punitive damages awarded to you in addition to your actual loses.

Another option of course, is to offer your evidence and testimony to a manufacturer who is conducting lawsuits.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

You're correct -- I quoted the wrong statute. My mistake. It does appear that the correct statute would be: 18 USC § 2315:

"Whoever receives, possesses, conceals, stores, barters, sells, or disposes of any goods, wares, or merchandise, securities, or money of the value of $5,000 or more, or pledges or accepts as security for a loan any goods, wares, or merchandise, or securities, of the value of $500 or more, which have crossed a State or United States boundary after being stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken, knowing the same to have been stolen, unlawfully converted, or taken..."

It could be argued that the music that has been stolen to create a counterfeit drive meets the monetary threshold to fall under this statute. I know we've paid far more than $5,000 for our music.

In addition, the fact that a counterfeit drive hasn't been considered "stolen goods" by your collegues does not mean that it is not, in fact, stolen goods. It simply may be that the argument has not yet been made in the proper forum. Remember, this is all relatively new activity in comparison to the laws of this country.

I would actually think that this might be an interesting tact for Sound Choice to take in its effort to go after the sellers of illegal hard drives. You stated: "Under the laws of most states, larceny requires that a tangible item be taken with the intent to deprive its owner of possession." The word "tangible" doesn't necessarily have to mean something that you can "touch." It is also something that is "substantially real," or "capable of being precisely identified or realized by the mind." The person who stole the music was effectively intending to deprive the owner of the product from profits they could have made from the product that had been stolen. Since Sound Choice was most likely one of the owners of the "property," then I would think perhaps this might be an area of law that you might be interested in expanding. If this is not encompassed in the current larceny laws, perhaps it should be. Laws are changed every day.

In any event, the bottom line is that this is still criminal activity, no matter how you slice it.

_________________
Birdofsong