Recording Industry Now Okay With Letting You Listen To Your CDs On Your iPod

from the how-kind-of-them dept

Tue, May 9th 2006 5:28pm — Mike Masnick

In the past, the recording industry has made it very clear they're not at all happy with the idea of people ripping songs off of legally purchased CDs for the sake of listening to them from their computers, portable music devices or burned CDs (remember how upset the industry was at Steve Jobs for "Rip. Mix. Burn."?). That's part of the reason why they've been shoving copy protection rootkits onto newer CDs. A few months ago, industry representatives even claimed that "fair use" doesn't cover ripping CDs to listen to on your digital music player. Instead, they claimed that they were simply looking the other way when people did that out of the kindness of their heart. While it can be argued whether or not it's fair use in the US, apparently it's not covered in the UK -- and the recording industry has magnanimously decided to ask the government to change copyright laws, to allow people to rip their own CDs, so they can be listened to on other devices. Of course, it's ridiculous enough that the industry has to give its approval to such a move. Also, considering how often labels are now putting copy protection on CDs, combined with anti-circumvention laws, all the industry has to do is put copy protection on CDs and they'll still be able to ban those personal copies.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

49 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

V, 9 May 2006 @ 6:52pm

This begs the question, who really runs our country? Our government, or the ones who pay them to stay in office. Wait, I know that's a dumb question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kualla, 9 May 2006 @ 7:51pm
  
  Von, thats exactly what I thought after reading th
  Unless this story is seriously lacking information, that sounds like a bunch of BS. This would have passed one way or another but for it to get passed by the RIAA simply asking does not make a bit of sense. Im not a government expert but I thought there was a long process that had to take place for laws to get passed, am I missing something here???
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JAK, 9 May 2006 @ 8:02pm
    
    Re: Von, thats exactly what I thought after readin
    What you are missing is that the RIAA funds the campaigns those who pass laws. Hence they can have laws written for them willy nilly.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ken, 9 May 2006 @ 7:00pm

Publicity Stunt
Its a publicity move. They're "giving in" on something they can in no way enforce except as you say through their own means of built in copy protection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Carmela, 9 May 2006 @ 7:22pm

Quit adding your 2 cents...that's going to add up and then what??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOL, 9 May 2006 @ 7:39pm

Get it?
LOL! I get it! V for Vendetta!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
m0rd3r, 9 May 2006 @ 7:51pm

Weaklings.
They still can't even admit to being wrong. Spineless and pathetic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ConceptJunkie (profile), 10 May 2006 @ 6:07am
  
  Re: Weaklings.
  They are not spineless and pathetic at all. This is a coldly calculated move to make them look more reasonable when the opposite is true. Their magnanimousness is a ploy. By appearing to allow something that is already clearly covered by Fair Use, they are appearing to make a concession. The sad thing is that this will probably buy them brownie points with Congress, who will then proceed to capitulate on any new legislation they want to pass which will give them more leverage to stomp all over the rights they have so "generously given" to us.
  
  Don't be fooled for a minute. This is just more posturing by a corrupt organization of companies that are desperately fighting to maintain the free ride they have had for so long. And I'm sure their lapdogs in Congress (Orrin Hatch call your office) are wetting themselves in excitement to serve their masters' new demands.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cashzilla, 9 May 2006 @ 8:02pm

Riaa
Rawrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!

RAWRRRRRRRRR!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous coward, 9 May 2006 @ 8:13pm

On Changing the law on Fair Use
So, by implication, I should be able to rip my DVDs, so that I can watch them on my video iPod, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Scott, 10 May 2006 @ 1:08am
  
  Re: On Changing the law on Fair Use
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- S, 10 May 2006 @ 2:38pm
  
  Re: On Changing the law on Fair Use
  no. that is the realm of the MIAA, not the RIAA
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tyler Larson, 9 May 2006 @ 8:20pm

Changing the Laws
The end result is, they hope, if they can change the law to explicitly enumerate what IS allowed, than all other (unincluded) fair-use applications of copyright law become void.

Suddenly their motives become clear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Disgusted, 9 May 2006 @ 8:32pm
  
  Re: Changing the Laws
  I wonder how much they think they can push...
  
  I also wonder who they think they are.
  
  This is a country of the people. I want to know who decided the corps are people. Oh ya the "supreme" court.
  
  So why arent these people put in jail?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2006 @ 1:19am
    
    Re: Re: Changing the Laws
    This is a country of the people. I want to know who decided the corps are people.
    
    The people who continually vote the republicans and democrats into office term after term after term. if you're really serious about getting rid of corrupt government bought and paid for by the megacorps find some new parties to support come November. Otherwise ya deserve the reaming ya get.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ralpho, 9 May 2006 @ 8:26pm

Government of the corps for the corps and by the corps.

Make the laws and inforce with there own private police.

Thats a free country as free as a death row inmate.

the republicans are gone and we can restore common sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DittoBox, 9 May 2006 @ 10:40pm
  
  Re:
  If you haven't noticed, most of the craptastic bills put out and passed by Congress are done by *both* Republicans and Democrats.
  
  Stop being a party hack, and look at the fact that nearly all capital hill politicians are either corrupt, stupid or both.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Scott Freeman, 10 May 2006 @ 4:29am
  
  Re:
  Not that I am any fan of the republicans but I should point out that we can thank the democrats from the DMCA.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
testudo, 9 May 2006 @ 8:59pm

Rancid Says...
Money always gonna equal clout
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris, 9 May 2006 @ 10:49pm

Bunk
Time and location shifting is Fair Use under the United States Code Section 17. I call shenanagins.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robert Duncan, 10 May 2006 @ 12:10am

RIAA?
This isn't the RIAA doing this. It's in the UK, so we have our favourite corporation the British Phonographic (I know what you're thinking) Industry [Wikipedia Article on BPI]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
oftro, 10 May 2006 @ 12:45am

Cd is a dying media
I think the RIAA should forget about cd's. It's a bit too late now to think about changing laws. There is a clear shift to purchase music through download pay sites. What's so special about distributing music by cd that the RIAA now asks to change the law? Instead of focusing on cd sales, why not focus on online sales?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- intro, 24 Jul 2006 @ 5:50am
  
  Re: Cd is a dying media
  Ah, wrong. Try checking sales figures before you spout off nonsense. CD sales have rebounded since 2004.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ben Robinson (profile), 10 May 2006 @ 1:15am

Digital DJ
There is almost no Fair Use rights here in the UK, you cannot copy anything ever unless you have a specific license to do so. The PPL (the UK organisation reponsible for public performance and broadcast licensing of the sound recordings owned by most UK record labels), are trying to get digital (i.e. MP3) DJs to buy their "Digital DJ License". For you £200($350ish) a year you don't get any public performance or broadcasting rights, you do not get the right to download anything or rip anyone elses CDs. All you get is a license to rip to your hard drive, CDs and vinyl you already own, and for personal use only. In the USA this would be covered by standard fair use rights, but we have no such thing in the UK.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
godkillzyou, 10 May 2006 @ 3:30am

The thing we all need to remember is that the 'best and the brightest' aren't running our country - they're running corporations. The people running our country are your average, run-of-the-mill C students. So, basically, anything that corporations want, corporations get... because they're smarter. And because they're smarter, they have all the money - which they use to lobby/bribe senators, congressmen, etc. It's like the cool kid in school getting the geek to do his homework for him. Our representatives in government are merely little assholes which companies stick money into, in order to get what they want. Then we're stuck smelling the RIAA's finger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
godkillzyou, 10 May 2006 @ 3:30am

The thing we all need to remember is that the 'best and the brightest' aren't running our country - they're running corporations. The people running our country are your average, run-of-the-mill C students. So, basically, anything that corporations want, corporations get... because they're smarter. And because they're smarter, they have all the money - which they use to lobby/bribe senators, congressmen, etc. It's like the cool kid in school getting the geek to do his homework for him. Our representatives in government are merely little assholes which companies stick money into, in order to get what they want. Then we're stuck smelling the RIAA's finger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- thecaptain, 10 May 2006 @ 5:18am
  
  Re:
  I hate to tell you this, but I don't think the "best and the brightest" are the ones running the corporations (with a few exceptions), rather the "rich and well connected".
  
  The "best and the brightest" work FOR the corporations.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Future CEO, 10 May 2006 @ 9:25am
    
    Good Stragety
    Ok, so I'm not the smartest (about 8 people smarter, jk) so there is only one way to for me to become smarter...get people smarter than me to work for me. Pay them what they deserve, listen to them and guide their collective thoughts.
    
    I'll be writing a book soon...
    
    You don't have to know it all if you know someone who does. Besides, not all people (even really smart ones) are capable/would even want to be the guy at the top...lotta people gunning for ya up there.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James Susanka, 10 May 2006 @ 6:59am

was it illegal?
I have been doing this for years - I always rip my cds to ogg format because it is free and unencumbered by patents.
Then I put the original cd in a safe spot.
And good lord I even copy the cd to other cds because I don't want to use the original in my car.
Such crimes - I guess I better go into hiding.
If I spend 30 bucks on a cd that I alredy bought in an album then they tell me I can't copy it to play on any of my owned computers. Well they can stick the cd's where the sun doesn't shine.

I will still continue to buy cds because I believe I have this right (fair use) and I will never buy anything online that has DRM in it. I did the same thing with albums and tapes - I always made copies of albums with tapes to put in my car.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tim, 10 May 2006 @ 7:20am

To all the Americans here talking about the RIAA
This is about fair use in the UNITED KINGDOM so the Recording Industry Association of AMERICA doesn't really have much to do with it now does it?

I wish people would actually read the articles first before shooting their mouths off...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tim, 10 May 2006 @ 7:24am

Nothing to do with Congress either, or Orrin Hatch, or the DMCA or the Democrats or Republicans.

Seriously.. can ANY of you people actually read?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob, 10 May 2006 @ 7:40am

RIAA Exonerates President Bush
Come on! Our President has ripped CD's on his iPod (Beatle's music)!

Therefore, as previous posts mention, it is a way to curry favor with government legislators by "giving in" to something that was and is already legal!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tim, 10 May 2006 @ 8:06am

IT IS NOT LEGAL IN THE UNITED KINGDOM. THIS IS THE BRITISH PHONOGRAPHIC INDUSTRY. WE DO NOT HAVE FAIR USE RIGHTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM. THE BPI IS ASKING THE GOVERNMENT TO EXPAND THE FAIR DEALING LAWS. LEARN TO READ.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Evan, 10 May 2006 @ 8:53am

The RIAA has huge cajones!
I can't understand why they feel the need to "allow" us to do this? We've been doing it since it was possible and would continue to do it even if they told us we can't. I think the only reason they are doing this is to boost record sales and cover up the whole mess they have made with "copy-protected" cds. They would never be able to 100% prevent people from copying CDs without releasing them on a new platform and anyone with 2 pebbles for a brain would not buy into a platform that restricts them from listening to THEIR music.

Is copying your music going to really affect record sales. They would argue that people who want to listen to their music on a portable digital device should buy the CD and a digital copy. The first problem with this idea is that not ALL music is available in digital format and certain devices only play music in certain formats (which would require you to convert the file format). I'm sure that RIAA would not be happy with us converting our MP3's into AAC's, they would want us to purchase the file in each format separately because that would be fair use.

Let's take a simple analogy to their ludicrous ideas. Suppose I have a document that I purchased in Word format. It is relatively simple to convert that document into a PDF, just a click of a button, but I should purchase the document in both formats. I should be required to pay for someone else to convert my document when I am qualified to click a button and do it for free. Suppose the even worse condition where I wanted a physical copy of that document. Instead of using my laser printer, I should pay for a hard copy of the document.

Now I am not condoning those people who might take the digital copy, convert it to hard copy and then sell it as that WOULD be ILLEGAL. But, when we are sold the document or song or CD we should have the right to do whatever we want with it as long as we don't profit from it or violate copyright and trademark laws.

Thanks RIAA for your approval to convert my CDS to MP3s, I appreciate all that you have done for me musically!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judge Dredd, 10 May 2006 @ 9:20am

Since when did anyone abide by the law? It's like saying nobody speeds on the interstate because cops enforce the speed limits. As long as technology exists, people will continue to do as they please with what they purchase or copy. I personally dont feel bound by the 'rules' set forth by the recording industry and their pawns in office. What I do on MY computer in MY house with MY accessories is my business. In my opinion, there is another Vietnam happening, except this time its online and the recording industry fills the USA's shoes. Too many you cant see. The ones that do get caught, are in a sense, sitting in the lobby of their local police station selling downloaded CDs to cops on their lunch break.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Peter Pickle Pecker, 10 May 2006 @ 9:27am

The RIAA is a recording industry marketing tactic to compensate for signing shitty artists and releasing shitty CDs. Thats all....

"If nobody will buy this crap, we'll sue potential for rediculous reasons and force a settlement to make up for the lost sales..." --- RIAA Informant (Chris Jackson)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STEVE, 10 May 2006 @ 9:40am

DO A LITTLE RESEARCH!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STEVE, 10 May 2006 @ 9:43am

TAKE 2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STEVE, 10 May 2006 @ 9:46am

LAST TRY, IT'S WORKING IN THE PREVIEW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 May 2006 @ 9:52am

Why is the text of my post not showing up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike (profile), 10 May 2006 @ 10:10am

SORRY!
Hey everyone,

Sorry, we were making a backend change and accidentally screwed up the comment code, meaning that a few comments were showing up blank. It should be working again.

Very sorry for the inconvenience...

Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dr. Daemon J. Thrion D.D., PhD., 10 May 2006 @ 10:31am

Pay the artist not the corp.
If anyone ever feels a pang of guilt over whether, or not they paid for, or paid enough for a piece of music, then drop a letter in the mail with your donation to the artist and explain what you are doing. I'm sure the artists will appreciate whatever you send MUCH more than their evil overlords. As a freelance audio engineer I see most bands coming off their first album and tour owing their recording company money (often much to their chagrin considering the number of units moved). This forces them to tour much more agressively and for longer than they would if left to their own devices leaving them tired and in bad spirits. It is also not a good bargaining position to go into your next project owing money to those cthuloid things that are demanding another disc that is better than the last and to have it done now. Slip a few bills to the band and help the whole scene (except the multinationals who are making obscene profits standing on the backs of the people creating the content that the peddle through Clear Channel and the other schlock mongers). As for the Supremes (no, not those Supremes) handing the cookie jar to the corps, it was more of an "Oops" than a direct action of the court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mitch, 10 May 2006 @ 2:34pm

why are you saying it's okay to put cd's onto an ipod when people have been doing it since ipods became popular. well thanks anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve, 10 May 2006 @ 5:33pm

Back to my rant...Do some research.
From the RIAA website:

http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp#stand

"Ask the RIAA

At the RIAA, we receive a range of questions on various topics. Our web site provides you with tools to find your answers to most questions, but in this space we'll also answer some of the questions we receive most often or those that aren't answered elsewhere on the site. To submit a question, send us an e-mail.

...

What is your stand on MP3?

This is one of those urban myths like alligators in the toilet. MP3 is just a technology and the technology itself never did anything wrong! There are lots of legal MP3s from great artists on many, many online sites. The problem is that some people use MP3 to take one copy of an album and make that copy available on the Internet for hundreds of thousands of people. That's not fair. If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail. But the fact that technology exists to enable unlimited Internet distribution of music copies doesn't make it right."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hwdp, 12 May 2006 @ 11:39pm

this country is turning in to a communist count hello
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Celloman, 15 May 2006 @ 1:54am

Audio Home Recording Act of 1992
Not sure if it's been mentioned - but I'd thought I'd remind y'all of this:

Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 provides the buyer of a CD or cassette with the right to not only make a copy for their own personal use, but also to make copies for friends as long as the original owner is not selling the copies or receiving any other type of compensation.

From Wikipedia:

"Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (AHRA) amended the US Copyright Act by adding chapter 10 "DIGITAL AUDIO RECORDING DEVICES AND MEDIA". The act was prompted by the release of the Sony Digital Audio Tape (DAT). The RIAA, concerned that consumers ability to make perfect digital copies of music would destroy the market for audio recordings, had lobbied Congress to pass the legislation.

AHRA brought new measures to prevent prohibition of manufacturing, importing, or selling of digital records and allowing consumers to be exempt from infringement for private noncommercial recordings in return for a royalty for the music being copied, a royalty for every recorder, and serial copy protection built into home devices. President George H. W. Bush signed the AHRA into law in 1992 proclaiming " S. 1623 [AHRA] will ensure that American consumers have access to equipment embodying the new digital audio recording technology. It also protects the legitimate rights of our songwriters, performers, and recording companies to be fairly rewarded for their tremendous talent, expertise, and capital investment."

But as other have pointed out - this article is about the UK's lack of Fair Use rights. Perhaps "Mike" should have included that in the headline?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 15 May 2006 @ 2:13am
  
  Re: Audio Home Recording Act of 1992
  But as other have pointed out - this article is about the UK's lack of Fair Use rights. Perhaps "Mike" should have included that in the headline?
  
  I say in the article that this is about the UK. For some reason, people keep assuming it's about the US, but I was clear in the article that it is not.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
pete, 19 Apr 2007 @ 12:49pm

ur gay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pete, 19 Apr 2007 @ 12:53pm

heres wat i think.
if the RIAA wants to ban copying music, ur gay. if they dont want to ban it, ur still going to be gay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]