EMi are in serious financial trouble did we forget that ?

Perosnally I think if you download stuff you've not paid for you have to take the responsibility for your stealing and if that means you get nicked at worst then face the reality, if it means your ISP warns you to protect themselves then so be it.


AllanB

 

Good, im glad they are in trouble!

What sort of idiot company expexts you to buy 3 copies of an album, one for the house stereo, one for the car and one for the mp3 player!

EMI are the tw@s who are challenging canadas fair usage policy of being allowed to copy a cd 3 times for personal use!

And cd's are way too expensive, 15 quid for some of them!

Charge realistic prices and i might buy instead of copy off mates!


With regards to file sharing, i generally use it to regain old stuff ive bought, then lost or damaged! so as far as im concerned i already have the rights to a copy anyway! Take Snoops first album, its 14 years old now, so my original copy is old and battered and wont play at all, i still ahve the physical cd which i bought legit but it doesnt work, so i downloaded it from a site and put it on my hard drive, that shouldnt be illegal! (tw@s like emi want you to buy a new copy when that happens!)

 

So, if I buy a new car and scratch it, or blow up the engine, I should be entitled to go to a showroom and nick a new one? It's the same concept. It's not the fault of EMI or any other music producer that you can't look after your albums...

 

It's not really the same concept now is it

 

If you use the argument that you back up CD's just incase you scratch it then yes it is.

As for the multi use of your purchased tracks it needs something realistic sorting out regarding fair use.

 

It's the data or music you're buying not the media. Cd's are quite a poor design in reality and not the media that they were made out to be ie scratch proof. In an environment such as the home it may be easier to take care of your Cd's but if they are used in the car etc it's a lot harder to ensure they don't pick up scratches rendering the media you've paid for unusable.

With regards to copying for multiple use well the case in point is above. It should be considered acceptable to made a copy of a music Cd for use in the car and one at home.

 

Actually you aren't even buying that. You are just buying the right to use it (a license in other words). You don't actually own the data or music.

True to a certain extent, however anyone with a bit of sense will make a backup copy for use in the car. This is technically not legal, but it's nowhere near as bad as downloading from the interweb. You may be honest and only download stuff which you alread "own", however I suspect that 99% of downloaders aren't so honest.

Personally I have cds that are over 12 years old sat on my shelf, and they are as pristine as the day I bought them. All have had regular use as well. I just look after things I repeat that you can't expect EMI or whoever to condone downloading copyrighted material simply because the original purchaser has let their dog eat it.

Agreed, although I don't understand why you need one for the home as well?

 

But to say, It's perfectly legal to make a back up copy of any media, what it;s legal is to circumvent any copy protection in order to do it.

Considering the vast majority of Cds do not have a any copy protection, then backing up is well withint your rights.

 

Not true. Even if a cd isn't copy protected, it doesn't mean that you have the right to copy it.

Whether you should have the right or not is a different issue. The fact is that if you do this at the moment with the law as it stands, this is in most cases illegal (unless specifically stated otherwise).

 

It is true - you are perfectly entitled to create a backup..

So long as it is for youir own use and you do not intend to sell it or transmit it.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48)

 

Where does it say that? Section 17, clause 2 states...

So, if you make a single electronic copy, you are violating the copyright.

 

Copyright law explicity says that you can make backuos - so long as you do not circumnavigate copy protection or sell the copies ofr financial gain.

From the point of view of Article 5(2)(b) of the Directive, people are allowed a fair dealing right to copy their old music collections so long as that is for personal use and they already own a licensed copy. In terms of the ’fair compensation’ that this paragraph provides, the individual has already
paid their license fee − the originator of the work has been paid. Provided that they retain the original copy of the recording, to show they had already licensed the recording for private use, the law should not bar the copying of recorded copyright works where the format they are recorded onto is becoming redundant. Such a fair dealing right would allow people to copy their records or cassettes, onto CD or encode them to MP3, to retain the use of the license they had originally purchased.

 

Are we looking at the same thing? That link you posted has no Article 5(2)(b) section, and the Article 5 it does have is to do with sound recordings and films (not music).

 

[QUOTE=Iain Young;7991724]Actually you aren't even buying that. You are just buying the right to use it (a license in other words). You don't actually own the data or music.


If thats the case then downloading my snoop cd is not a problem, cos i have paid for the right to use it, albeit 14 years ago!

 

In theory that should be ok. The problem is that for every 1 person downloading it legally, there are likely hundreds doing it illegally. Not to mention the fact that it's illegal to post these things to the interweb in the first place...

 

Sorry Iain, that should bee section 50(a)

And it seems it *doesn't* extend to CD's and DVD's, which I am amazed by - It only covers computer programs (read: Videogames)

So you were right after all..

Copyright law on backing-up videogames

 

Cool. Wasn't arguing for the sake of it. Was just interested

 

Seeing that one can now buy HD-DVDs for just £3.99 it goes to show what teh "true" costs of CDs or DVDs and even Blueray/HD-DVds are...

Afterall at £3.99, the makers are still making money, as the net cost of the media production for each copy is pennies.

Maybe if DVDs and CDs etc were intitally £3.99 to start with, then maybe the pirate industry wouldn't have been as vast as it is today!

 

No no, me too

 

I dont think there is a huge argument to bring down the price of DVD's/CD's. They are at a price now, where you can go into Tescos andI for one am quit ehappy to pay £8.99 for a CD - I mean in real terms, they are much, much cheaper than LP's were in the 80's.


BluRay and video games, absolutely yes. And I firmly beleive that both would benefit from a reduction in price in terms of sales.

 

we should be able to buy them direct from distributor prices and not the shops £3 markup