Do you mainly stream music or own it?

[sarumbear]

You shouldn't need a damn license to archive. Look at archive.org, you can archive video games legally.

I posted the legal interpretation of the UK and US laws. You can read and should understand what I did.

Do you ever see anybody going to jail just because they shared a out-of-print CDs. The only time you'll see anybody go to jail is when people share currently released media that actually makes companies & artists lose millions of dollars. In my home state, It's technically illegal to collection rain water but people do it anyways.

As I said before, your arguing about the law is not my concern nor I can comment what will happen if you will be found out stealing music.

 

[ThatM1key]

I posted the legal interpretation of the UK and US laws. You can read and should understand what I did.

As I said before, your arguing about the law is not my concern nor I can comment what will happen if you will be found out stealing music.

I mean in UK, you shouldn't need a license to archive.

As I said before, your arguing about the law is not my concern nor I can comment what will happen if you will be found out stealing music.

That's all I can do about it, just question the law.

 

[sarumbear]

That's all I can do about it, just question the law.

Wrong forum

 

[sarumbear]

As a home consumer I can legally make a copy/rip/backup of the media I bought.

Audio Home Recording Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

RIAA page disagrees with Wikipedia article.

 

[ThatM1key]

Why does RIAA, who are the ones who sue people successfully, says otherwise then?

Because they like money. They sued grandmas, dead people, people that actually didn't pirate, etc, etc.

RIAA page disagrees with Wikipedia article.

The act doesn't care

 

[flyzipper]

I can record from the radio legally

It's a leap to go from making personal recordings for private non-commercial use (Home Audio Recording Act), something that was created to allow "time-shifting" of content (for example), to using that legislation to legitimize piracy. There are specifics to that legislation that you're overlooking.

 

[sarumbear]

Because they like money. They sued grandmas, dead people, people that actually didn't pirate, etc, etc.

The act doesn't care

In other words if you don’t want to be sued, don’t break the law and do not Rip/Copy/Archie/Download/etc.

 

[Momotaro]

... Every time you spend money you deprive yourself of the opportunity to invest wealth.

$10 a month over 30 years invested at the historical rate of return for the stock market of 9.5% would give you about $18,000.

Sound like a plan:

1. sell audio gear
2. invest
3. keep myself amused by whistling tunes of moral rectitude for the next few decades
4. cash in and buy a shit-load of CDs

*I mostly stream

 

[Robin L]

Why does RIAA, who are the ones who sue people successfully, says otherwise then?

Greedy, lazy, a little slow.

They certainly aren't looking at the granular level these people are talking about, downloading a mastering that they can't find otherwise. Besides, there ought to be a statute of limitations for something you've already bought five times in five different masterings. RIAA could never cook up enough funding to attempt to catch anyone who wants to copy a wav. file of a MFSL title. They're looking to run down the stuff that will produce headlines, stuff where a lot of money moved suddenly, which hasn't really been a winning program for them anyway.

 

[sarumbear]

Anyway, I leave you to agree on more reasons to justify why the copyright laws are wrong and wish you not to be caught by the long arm of the law. There’s no Hi-Fi in prison and you may not have much left to buy new music after paying those huge fines.

 

[Robin L]

Anyway, I leave you to agree on more reasons to justify why the copyright laws are wrong and wish you not to be caught by the long arm of the law. There’s no Hi-Fi in prison and you may not have much left to buy new music after paying those huge fines.

 

[Garcia]

I mostly listen to Spotify Free on my EQ'ed HD668B

 

[ThatM1key]

In other words if you don’t want to be sued, don’t break the law and do not Rip/Copy/Archie/Download/etc.

Technically yes. RIAA doesn't go after individuals for pity downloads like in the 2000's. RIAA only sues people that actually make them lose millions and millions of dollars.

Anyway, I leave you to agree on more reasons to justify why the copyright laws are wrong and wish you not to be caught by the long arm of the law. There’s no Hi-Fi in prison and you may not have much left to buy new music after paying those huge fines.

RIAA is going after people like the owner of Rip Requests not average joe's. It would be a waste of money to due so.

RIAA doesn't want another one of these again:

RIAA Sues Deceased Grandmother

The recording industry's latest assault on file sharing has netted an unusual suspect: a deceased great-grandmother from West Virginia. In a lawsuit filed in January, the RIAA accused 83-year old Gertrude Walton of sharing over 700 pop, rock and rap songs under the alias

betanews.com

 

[Robin L]

Technically yes. RIAA doesn't go after individuals for pity downloads like in the 2000's. RIAA only sues people that actually make them lose millions and millions of dollars.


RIAA is going after people like the owner of Rip Requests not average joe's. It would be a waste of money to due so.

RIAA doesn't want another one of these again:

RIAA Sues Deceased Grandmother

The recording industry's latest assault on file sharing has netted an unusual suspect: a deceased great-grandmother from West Virginia. In a lawsuit filed in January, the RIAA accused 83-year old Gertrude Walton of sharing over 700 pop, rock and rap songs under the alias

betanews.com

"I believe that if music companies are going to set examples they need to do it to appropriate people and not dead people," Chianumba told the Gazette. "I am pretty sure she is not going to leave Greenwood Memorial Park to attend the hearing."

 

[sonitus mirus]

"I believe that if music companies are going to set examples they need to do it to appropriate people and not dead people," Chianumba told the Gazette. "I am pretty sure she is not going to leave Greenwood Memorial Park to attend the hearing."

Talk about commitment, she really did RIP that music.

 

[InsideTheWire]

I mostly own my music, I have ripped my 1K+ cds to my HD. When I do stream it's mostly from Bandcamp and it's music I have either bought on bandcamp or ripped from my personal collection. I do still listen to cds on my Audiolab 6000cdt through my 20+ year old Harmon Kardon AVR110 (next in line to be ugraded).

 

[pseudoid]

But yet I can record from the radio legally?

Are you 101% certain?

Maybe soon, 'they' will pass a law for mandatory installation of in-ear meters, so that you can literally 'pay-as-you-go'!

 

[ThatM1key]

Are you 101% certain?
View attachment 176822
Maybe soon, 'they' will pass a law for mandatory installation of in-ear meters, so that you can literally 'pay-as-you-go'!
View attachment 176823

I Microsoft with the Xbox One's Kinect wanted to charge you more for a rental if it detected there was more people around you.

 

[pseudoid]

The "Center for the Study of the Public Domain" at Duke Law school has different perspectives regarding

One such interesting article "What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2013? Under the law that existed until 1978 … Works from 1956" makes a mockery of the current system, like the era of "55MPH Saves Lives" laws but one that just refuses to die [already!].

Some of us may remember a federal jury verdict against RobinThicke/PharrellWilliams, ordering them to pay MarvinGay heirs... to the tune of $7.4Million. Page titled "The "Blurred Lines" of the Law" delves into the intricate spider-web called 'copyright-infringement' and what exactly is the definition of "original, creative expression". Me thinx it is like snake-oil's secret ingredient.

 

[Momotaro]

Having said I mostly stream, and having made fun of @bladerunner6's plan for septuagenarian wealth, I should examine the economics.

My particular "pay forever, own never" plan currently has ~35,000 items in an Apple Music library. Let's say 10-20 tracks per album, so up to 3500 CDs. When I bought them new in ancient times, they were AUD $20-30 per CD, so maybe $70,000 to "own" my current lot on physical media. Compared to Apple Music at $17.99 monthly for the next 50 years so approximately $10,000 of today's dollars—the price will creep up, and money will be worth less yada yada— it isn't a bad deal.

Of course, I'd not have bought quite that many CDs. There was a thing called radio, which I really didn't like much, JJJ and FBI-FM notwithstanding.

There's the odd downside. Grimes updated the artwork on streamed versions of Anthropocene which was odd when they just changed (I liked the original versions better). And even though I downloaded CouCou Chloe's Doom, my Music.app has just decided not to play it (religious people who don't understand tolerance in a secular society nixed that one). And X-Ray Spex discography disappeared more-or-less entirely. So sometimes you do want to own stuff. No one's stopping me doing both.