Karaoke Forums

I'm glad I used Taylor as an example, thanks for letting me know about this. I'll be buying them the next time I am at Wal-Mart. If only every artist would to this.

_________________
Jeff Wheeler, moonlight DJ/KJ

The copying of regular music CDs to computers or Ipods has been argued by the RIAA to be illegal.

While these arguments have been presented in some court cases that involved OTHER acts of copyright violation as well, this specific issue has not at all been decided by any case (the most recent case where it was argued the Plaintif was convicted of distributing music through file shareing, the fact that he bought the music CDs did not bear on the conviction). Howell vs Atlantic

According to this view, any copying of CDs onto any modern music device such as an Ipod is not legal. Obviously the whole industry of MP3 players is largely based on transfer of music onto MP3 players, often from privately owned CDs.

If the music industry thought they could sucessfully argue the case they would.

An interesting note by the judge in the Howell vs Atlantic case with regards to these matters is below:


The judiciary’s reluctance to expand the protections afforded by the copyright
without explicit legislative guidance is a recurring theme. Sound policy, as
well as history, supports our consistent deference to Congress when major
technological innovations alter the market for copyrighted materials. Congress
has the constitutional authority and the institutional ability to accommodate
fully the varied permutations of competing interests that are inevitably
implicated by such new technology. In a case like this, in which Congress has
not plainly marked our course, we must be circumspect in construing the scope
of rights created by a legislative enactment which never contemplated such a
calculus of interests.
Sony Corp. of Am. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 431 (1984) (citations
omitted).

http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?fi ... 29Decision

I got a headache....

Thanks for that one, Lon. I would've gotten yelled at if I brought it up...

I know no one will believe me, 'cause it's more fun to debate, but:

Copying from disc to disc for backup is perfectly legal, and shown clearly to be so in the software suits of the late 90's / early 2000's. Please note: I said DISC to DISC ( or really same media to same media ), not ripped to computer- still gray there.

It also does not matter which version of a disc ( the backup or the original ) that you use, as long as it's single site use. I WILL say that I prefer making a backup from the pristine original, then using the original in the show. I do this simply because I think the mfrs. discs LOOK cooler when laid out- esthetics only. Also, I can resurface the originals if need be.

Keeping even damaged originals is a good idea, simply because they are better than even receipts for proof of purchase.


Anyway, the above applies to software, movies, music, CD+Gs, and anything else, as long as the original has been PURCHASED ( C'mon, you know you're not supposed to copy those rentals... )


OK, feel free to ignore.....

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Yes, software can be backed up. Now, show me where in the law it states you can do that with CD's.

The section of the any US copyright law will be fine.

Thanks

_________________
Kevin

Tell me the case history where you can not for use by someone who owns the origional disks.

Text intentionally grey.

Pragmatism rearing ugly head -- I have format shifted to a harddrive. I make an honest living hosting shows. I buy all my music legally and I don't multi-rig. (I do speed occasionally, I have been known to talk on my cell phone while driving, I do park longer in a spot than posted, I have tasted a grape to see if they're sweet enough to buy a whole bag...)

So, I have no problem sleeping at night because I have backup copies in the form of actual CDGs and I use a computer to play those same discs. I play singer's discs even if they ARE copies because who am I to argue with them that they're not using their own backup copies of originals? I can think of more than one reason not to take originals to a show you're unfamiliar with -- I don't do it myself. I think paranoia about this is getting the best of some on here. Stop worrying, don't advertise how you actually play your music, and enjoy hosting.

Show me the law that allows that for software.

Any section of any US copyright law will do.

Hint: there isn't any. However it's allowed under what is considered fair use and been tested in court multiple times. No different than CDs.

There also isn't any law saying you can format shift any copyrighted item however there is precedence for it. "Ripping" an audio CD is considered fair use by many lawyers (and judges), based on the 1984 Betamax decision and the 1999 Rio MP3 player decision (RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, 180 F. 3d 1072, 1079, 9th Circ. 1999.)

The law about format shifting from CD to MP3 has been tested numerous times and found to be reasonable fair use. This includes even commercial use of music in the form of entertainment such as DJs. Perhaps the current Sound Choice brouhaha will shed light on the graphics track on the CD+G, the only different between the general music format DJs use and the format that KJs use.

Unfortunately, it is apparent that Sound Choice has no intention on seeing the inside of a courtroom during these "lawsuits". Even if they did, it would be trademark law that would be tested, not copyright law, which is what format shifting falls under.
And I am willing to bet that Sound Choice will never want the format shifting aspect tested in a court of law, since they know they will lose. The way it is right now, they can cry foul and convince people that format shifting is illegal, even though it isn't - it's just not specifically legal at the moment.

I think if the format shifting was tested in court, and the court said that it was ok, it would make things easier for SC to set up a download site. But I don't think that would be the case. I think all SC would have to prove would be that the CD was copied and the court would have to decide if it was an infringement.

JMO though. Johnnie Cochran I'm not. However, if someone used the Chewbacca Defense, they may get somewhere.

_________________
Kevin

Don't even think the North American authorities would follow The UK's example in bringing out a "Format Shifting" License......(ProDub)...as I believe the Manufacturers get no recompense from this license,and so would block it

Well the legality is always up to the fair use test. It's eventually going to come up if they continue to press people. Right now they are catching people in the gray area that may have legal disks and some they can't account for, and are simply trying to recoup some money from them. That is only gonna last till they get some attorney who runs a karaoke show for a hobby, doesn't mind burying them in paperwork and actually forces a legal decision.

The problem is that the manus including most of the whole music industry not just the karaoke industry don't really want to fight format shifting. The industry realizes that the tech of the future is digital stored media on hard drives or something similar. The CD run show is a dead end tech, and the law will eventually realize that.

The only reason they want to discourage it is that it makes it really easy to detect the people who run shows of computers who are often using copies of music they don't own.

The situation of the law being a grey area with regards to format shifting is that it allows development of new (and better) technology is good for the industry in the long term.

The problem is that the music industry has to figure out how to sell the product that people want (digital stored media) without getting trapped in the worry about piracy that the new tech also makes easier.

It would be very easy for SC or some other manu to just keep records of the legally purchased downloads and then use those records when they suspect piracy. I suspect that is the future, if the industry is to survive.

Not so easy as you think. SC and others have authorized regional distributors.
What would have to happen is a distributor would have to keep track of each individual he sold to.
But then what if that individual sold his collection to someone else?
I recently bought a collection that I know for a fact has been sold to no less than 3 different people other than the original owner. I know this because it originally belonged to my hubby and he told me who he sold it to and I know I didn't buy it from that guy. Who knows how many others are in the chain? And what if one of them has died or moved out of country or otherwise can't be located to verify the sale?
What if they are just a jerk and tell the manu to screw off?
I know I probably would. Why bother me and waste my time with something I sold 5 years ago to a guy I don't know and don't remember?

That's where the queue can be taken from software because that's all the media is at that point. Then the service becomes more like iTunes than a disk shuffling service. No I don't have great ideas on what DRM would be required to keep things working but I suspect something can certainly be arranged.

That seems like an interesting situation. Someone buys someone else's CDG collection and then rips the tracks to a hard drive and then turns right around and sells the discs to someone else who does the same thing and somehow, the discs wind up in the oriiginal owner's hands. Is that really that much different than selling loaded hard drives?

The way I envision it would have to be is that you would either have to have the disks themselves currently owned (which can be resold but then you would lose the right to use the songs on your hard drive)

The other option is that you could by the songs as digital downloads that would be registered in your name and would be a NON-Transferable commodity.

The registry would only be for digital downloads, and only liscenced dealers of SC downloads would be able to add you to the database....


I don't think the I-pod DRM system that requires internet verification will work.

I recently had to reboot my laptop when I was at a show that did not have internet connection. Instantly all of my Itunes songs were "decertified" until I could get online and log back in with a pasword to itunes. Fortunately I did not need my Itunes songs for the show but I would hate to depend on such a system if I was going to be a mobile KJ doing shows where I could not know about internet connections in advance.

Here's a link to read for the format shifters:

http://www.imaginelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1196173.html

This attorney's opinion is that it is okay. This probably explains why no one goes after DJ's or anyone else that uses a computer.

_________________
Kevin

Interesting read and no surprises in that read.

Still remains to be tested in court.

Now, Bruce: Where in any of my post did you see ANYTHING about ripping?
You really need to slow down and stop taking things out of context and making assumptions when there is nothing to indicate that such assumptions should be made.
That simply isn't what happened. I'm talking about physical discs. Incidentally, said discs will never be ripped. They are for my rental system, which is disc based.