UK Advertising Board Says CD Jukebox With Hard Drive Can't Advertise That It Copies Music, Since That's Infringement
from the this-is-ridiculous dept
We've seen the entertainment industry flip out and kill innovative products like a DVD juke box that makes digital copies of your DVDs so that you can access and watch them more easily. Over in the UK, apparently they're also killing similar things for CDs. Derek Slater points us to the news that the Advertising Standards Authority in the UK has whacked the advertisements for the Brennan JB7 CD player, which is a CD player with a hard drive, because it advertises that it can copy your music... and that's illegal. Yes, even though it's for personal use. Over in the UK, you technically have no right to make personal copies of CDs, and since the advertisement doesn't make that clear, the ad is "inciting" infringement:The ASA noted the product was a CD player as well as having a hard disk to store CDs and also record from vinyl and cassette. We also noted, however, it repeatedly made reference to the benefits of the product being able to copy music but did not make clear that it was illegal to do so without the permission of the copyright owner. We considered the overall impression of the ad was such that it encouraged consumers and businesses to copy CDs, vinyl and cassettes. In the absence of prominent explanation, we concluded that the ad misleadingly implied it was acceptable to copy CDs, vinyl and cassettes without the permission of the copyright owner. We also considered that the ad encouraged people to use the advertised product in this way and that, therefore, it incited consumers to break the law.
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
Filed Under: advertising, copies, hard drive, personal usage, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
makes perfect sense to me
google's cache feature is basically a copy of popular websites. but since google doesn't say that it is, it's totally legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: makes perfect sense to me
google's cache feature is basically a copy of popular websites. but since google doesn't say that it is, it's totally legal."
While I agree with your sentiment and think this is how things should work, the law says differently, unfortunately. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, after all. And you cant trick your way around it by just talking around it either. Wish it werent so, but this is the world we live in that has been bought and paid for by corporate interests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The job of the ASA is to protect advertisers from legal liability (incitement in this case), and the public from misleading information (i.e., that it is legal to rip music from CDs).
What the ASA did here was exactly the right thing. Whether they agree with the law or not is really neither here nor there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not misleading at all. It's perfectly acceptable. What isn't acceptable is a law that makes this kind of format shifting illegal to begin with.
I wonder how many MP's have used iTunes to copy their own CD's onto their iPod's, surely more than none.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
i'm guessing the wording was wrong on the advert (guessing due to not bothering to read the article)
a simple disclaimer about not for piracy should clear them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But before it, there is a long list of politicians and industry executives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take note...
Maybe time to put in a FOIA to see who that complaint came from me thinks...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Take note...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Copying without the permission of the person who put work into creating the product is illegal too.
Best wishes.'
'You can copy to your iPhone all music you have paid for - and will continue to be able to.'
'You say "from what I can tell" but I'm sure if this was illegal then there would have been at least one case to test the law. I know of no successful cases ergo this is not the law.'
So fro what i can tell MPs have no idea either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
"As bad as the IP douche bags in the US are, they don't even hold a candle to those wankers in the UK."
The worst offenders are usually parts of US-based corporate conglomerates, or at least the same corporations as you have there.
Besides, if you notice, nothing is actually being stopped here apart from a certain type of advertising. The silly laws about copying for private use are pretty much unenforceable. This is simply an advertising watchdog making sure that a device manufacturer is not advertising an illegal use for its product. It's silly that the law is there to begin with for personal use, but it's hardly Orwellian.
"the omnipresence of video camera monitoring"
That tends to be overstated, IMHO, and usually dates back to a study that was made using extremely flawed methodology. A large proportion of monitoring is privately owned, in public spaces such as petrol stations, pubs and shops and it hardly covers everywhere outside of city centres, and often not even there. Same as in the US, or at the very least you're not far behind.
"vapidity of the royals-worshipping general populace"
Please. The number of people in your country who actually "worship" the royals is probably the same as in the UK. A lot of us would be happy to be shot of them and "worship" them enough to force them to pay taxes, among other things. I certainly won't be celebrating the royal wedding, although I may appreciate the potential extra day off work for my family on the day.
As for "vapidity" of the populace... that's a mighty fine glass house you have there, maybe you should stop throwing those rocks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: George Orwell prophesied this kind of shite
Besides, the IP laws here are mostly the US's fault anyway we just don't have a constitution to hide in to slow the manic removal of common sense in this area :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright does not mean you get to dictate technology
Copyright does not mean you get to dictate the techology that is available to be copied and there are well established court precedences that have ruled that simply having a devise that CAN facilitate illegal activities is not a reason to ban them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weird
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weird
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On behalf of Colt we would like to engage your services to review our advertising campaign for the new Colt 355.d-mag (the �Gun�). The Gun is a semi-automatic with a chamber that can hold �up to� 5 bullets. These can be discharged using the Gun by repeatedly pressing the trigger mechanism. Here is the text of our advert:
�Buy this Gun. It�s great. It has the capacity to store up to 5 bullets and the ability to fire repeatedly until the storage chamber is empty.�.....
Response from Solicitor:
Dear Mr. Colt,
We reviewed with interest your suggested advertisement. While any normal person would fully understand your advertisement, we must inform you of a recent decision by the UK Advertising Standards Authority. As you may know, they have recently prohibited the manufacturer of a DVD from advertising that the DVD player contains a hard drive. The decision was based upon the claim that the hard-drive could be used illegally to duplicate material that was protected under various copyright laws.
Our concern with your proposed advertisement is the reference to the ability to actually shoot the weapon (and to do so repeatedly up to 5 times in rapid succession). As you know, discharging a firearm in the UK is illegal when the weapon is (a) within a populated area, or (b) pointed at another human. Of course nothing in this letter addresses the other various illegal acts that could be undertaken with the proposed product (e.g. robbery, violations of noise ordinances, or the like). We are therefore concerned that your advertisement may encourage others to act in a manner contrary to the law by discharging your weapon in a manner contrary to the above restrictions. For this reason, we strongly urge you to revise your advertisement to read as set forth below:
New UK Advertisement: �Buy this Gun�
We may also suggest that your advertisement contain conditions of sale which list all of the acts that constitute a prohibited use of a firearm in the United Kingdom. However, given the length of text that would be required, we would require a retention deposit of �25,000.00 prior to undertaking such work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They didn't forget, they just stopped paying lip service to the idea that they weren't doing it in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Elmer Fudd
I mean, the freaking work is being done FOR them! All they have to do is got to the table and negotiate RATIONALLY and they would more than likely make money from this and then look at there! Another revenue stream for them that requires no effort other than basically cashing a check.
(That is their favorite thing to do right?)
Money for nothing, innovation for free. Get on board you big dummies!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USB record decks
consistent - NOT.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: USB record decks
Ah this to my knowledge (IANAL) is where UK law gets a little odd. Hopefully (what am I saying??) there's a UK lawyer around to clarify...
Prior to our version of DCMA (which I think came in about '97 or '98) it was completely legal under UK law to hold a backup copy of media that you owned. When the 1997(?) act became law it essentially made that illegal, though the law original wasn't removed.
AFAIK the limitation of the "fair use backup" only applies for stuff published after the new law came into effect so "Record to MP3" is likely to be outside this limitation for most content (how much vinyl is made after 1997?).
Of course, if I'm right about that then a lot of CDs are also legal to rip for personal "backup" use, so a portion of CD to MP3 functionality would also be legal so it's still inconsistent.
My other question is why this device when every single iPhone/Pod/Pad/Pwhatever device for example also comes with exactly the same functionality in iTunes?? I can't see Apple devices being quite so popular if the "illegality" of ripping a CD to MP3 was suddenly enforced with the usual draconian pointless brutality can you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawyers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Double standardsO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Double standardsO
To use a handy car analogy, most drivers speed, but advertising a car with the claim �Performs excellently at well over the legal speed limit.�, however true that might be, would be asking for trouble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Double standards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]