Brazil Looks To Criminalize Ripping A CD?
from the how-quickly-they've-fallen dept
Over the past few years, it really looked like Brazil was close to becoming one of the most progressive countries on copyright issues. It was embracing fair use and the public domain in a strong way, and was even considering proposals to fully legalize file sharing. And, of course, the music industry is thriving in Brazil as well, in part due to the embracing of free distribution. The government had also embraced open culture in a variety of ways, even using Creative Commons licenses on government websites.How quickly things change.
Within months of a new administration coming to town, the new Culture Minister, ordered the Creative Commons license off of the Ministry's website. When asked why, she said "We will discuss copyright reform when the time comes." But having a CC license on a webpage has nothing to do with copyright reform. However, it was a warning sign that such efforts were coming, and rather than continuing the progress made in the country, the new administration was looking to go in the other direction.
Now it appears that we're seeing some of those efforts in action. The country is considering a broad new "cybercrime" bill, that, among other things, will criminalize both file sharing and ripping a CD to a computer. File sharing may involve infringement, but at a civil, not criminal level. The fact that the government seems to be going much further is ridiculous -- especially at a time when the Brazilian technobrega scene has demonstrated so clearly how an entire musical culture can thrive (and make lots of money) without even using copyright (and even actively ignoring it and encouraging the widespread sharing of works).
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: brazil, copyright, cybercrime, file sharing, ripping
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Obviously the MAFIAA was the origin of the money, but how many politicians in this country and abroad were involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In this case I'm betting on Mitch Bainwol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ 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 ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mainly, set up a bureaucracy that is anathema to the freedoms that Brazil had.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And this is very far from new, they only resurrected it after the latest broad scale attacks from lulzsec and the likes against several sites, some of them targeted Government sites. So they are using collective hysteria and a nice amount of media misleading news (hackers are pretty much any1 that can successfully turn on a computer and they are all evil and the State is at fault for not providing security - bla bla bla, always the same bs) all to push the PL into effective law.
It has failed a few times already but as all MAFIAA related stuff it keeps coming back to life. And that because lobby is forbidden in Brazil. Imagine if it wasn't.
So Mike, please fix it, it's not a 'broad new' law but rather a 'reanimated corpse' law. As always, no1 wants it, there is no need for it (considering the way Brazil IS heading - towards open and fair use), current laws already deal with online crimes just fine but MAFIAA needs further police powers. Except this time they are pushing for real criminalization, it's worse than on most countries. If sanity prevails as it has been prevailing they'll fail, yet again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I mean actually rule a country and not silently buy off politicians until the country is effectively yours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Legislative Capture
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Legislative Capture
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
However, not all DVDs use copy pretection. Those that don't are perfectly legal to copy, with the usual restrictions (all copies and the original are to be treated as a single unit, so if you give, sell, or loan the title out you must include the original and all copies).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: They will just rip CD's anyways...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Illegal in the UK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Translation: ignoring copyright law.
Y'know, cuz it's important your readers can leech off the works of others.
You're such a worthless slimeball, Masnick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
See troll bait.
See troll hide in shadows.
See troll pounce on victim!
Pounce, troll, pounce!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If I can beat our fascist government and find ways to bypass and completely ignore their extensive internet monitoring. I sure as hell can beat some lawyer in a expensive suit looking for more money. Mao couldn't stop us, and neither can you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You're right. They can't stop that. And apparently neither can you.
But at least you'll have some company here with the rest of your fellow TD posters.
Your lives are meaningless. That's why you're so angry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Wait... Aren't you a TD poster?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
...and the irony is OFF THE CHARTS folks!
it's what ALOT of people think about the MAFIAA, IP/patent/copyright supporters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
On the issue of copy protection, if the technology has rendered it useless, which it has, then any laws forbidding it are both irrelevant and ineffective. It is technology and what it enables that should define the laws concerning it, and not the other way around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For no good reason,
Mud slinging may not convince people of the validity of an argument, but it is proven very effective in distracting them from the flaws. It also distracts the audience from the validity of the opponents arguments.
That said, it still remains true that personal attacks are the last civil refuge of the incompetent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
excuse me? copyrightists have been leeching off the works of others since the law was implemented
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
about the only thing you've got going for yourselves these days is fucking everyone else over, leeching off royalty welfare and scapegoating anyone who doesn't just bow down to whatever you say
copyrightists are a cancer on this earth
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Ignoring US copyright law. Last time I checked the US didn't rule the world, though many of its citizens seem to think it does. And just because something is a law doesn't mean it's correct. That's why the courts are allowed to overturn laws.
"You're such a worthless slimeball, Masnick."
Oh, name-calling. Well, that convinced me that you're right! Your logic is impeccable.
And now it is time to roll back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Individual Liberties are out of style...
That's exactly how the creative process works. However, that has nothing to do with the situation in Brazil.
PAYING CUSTOMERS are having their property rights stripped from them. The situation has nothing to do with "leeching".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Said twice for effect
Translation: ignoring copyright law.
Y'know, cuz it's important your readers can leech off the works of others.
You're such a worthless slimeball, Masnick.
very well put +10
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, it has nothing to do with the fact that Brazilian musicians made a lot more money by "ignoring copyright law."
Those damn musicians! Leeches, all of them! What worthless slimeballs!
Thank god my life isn't meaningless, or I'd be really angry about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leeches, every goddamn one of you!
Here's a quote from a blog post by one of those "leeches:"
- quoted in Brazil: Amplified conversations to fight the Digital Crimes Bill from Global Voices Online.
Goddamn leeches with their "demonstrations" and their concerns about "the monopoly of power." How fucking dare they! We all know that "exercising our citizenship" is just a code word for "piracy." Everyone knows that if you give people freedom of choice, the only thing they'll choose to do is rip off my employers^H^H^H^H artists!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Leeches, every goddamn one of you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How is a discussion on how Brazil is attempting to set up copyright rules more restrictive than the US "ignoring it"?
"Y'know, cuz it's important your readers can leech off the works of others."
From what I can see, the main objection is to the criminalisation of ripping CDs you've already bought. Please supply your superior reasoning to tell me how ripping CDs you've paid for constitutes "leeching", since nobody else can see it.
"You're such a worthless slimeball, Masnick."
Once. Just once, try to formulate an argument that is based on logic and doesn't resort to baseless personal attacks. You'd be surprised at how well they're received.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think the law is hip and retro. Who doesn't remember ripping CDs way back in the 90s? It was fun.
However, if they actually intend to enforce the statute, it'll need about a two decade long statute of limitations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CD the Ripper
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
New versions of iTunes and other software
Or at the very least, relabel the "import CD" buttons to "Perform criminal act."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: New versions of iTunes and other software
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
I think you should reconsider this, or at least rephrase it. Saying that the RIAA does not want to criminalize the ripping of CDs is like saying that anti-abortionist don't won't to outlaw birth control.
(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/08/02/135422/-Wisconsin-attempts-to-ban-birth-control ;
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2006/03/20/anti_contraception)
Of course they do. They’re just aware that it would hurt their current and more achievable goals if they were to openly state this fact.
The RIAA only settled for a surcharge on blank cassettes in the '80s because outlawing the taping of vinyl albums, and/or tape decks, wasn't an achievable goal.
Never assume that today's tyranny is the final destination to which your oppressors plan to drive you at the end of a whip.
“Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
However, I confess that I have not read the article (not the article in the PDF, I read that so many times), so that is all I know about it and made assumptions around the premise. Would the RIAA want to put the toothpaste of DRM-free music on all music stores and CD-ripping back in the tube? It wouldn't surprise me in the least if that's the case.
However, if the RIAA can't put the proverbial toothpaste back in the tube up here, how would they expect it to be done in Brazil, where it is proven that sensible -- not overly restrictive -- copyright law has proven good for the economy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
"In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer."
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html)
Both Kazaa and the destruction of evidence were involved in the case which centered on the "making available" issue. It's a bit murky if the RIAA was claiming that ripping alone was illegal or if it was the combo of ripping/making available. I found no reference to the final outcome.
Bottom line is they have played with the claim that ripping a purchased CD is illegal in the past, so I doubt it's been scratched from their wish list entirely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
They have not, because they know it would lose in court. The Sony ruling explicitly held that making personal copies was fair use under the law (as long as you don't distribute those copies to someone else).
They have, however, sued people who downloaded digital versions of CD's that they already bought - and the court, sadly, agreed that it was infringement. I'll have to dig up the case, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “Intellectual property” is an oxymoron.
The majority in Sony v. Universal made it quite clear this was not an issue it was deciding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The best evidence of what a document says is the document itself, and not a string of references that are hearsay, upon hearsay, upon hearsay, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why a translation?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know this becuase back in the 1990s, I had trouble with the kids of one housekeeper I had that would try to get my computer started, but I could use a pirated CyberSitter, which I did back in the 1990s, but using a firewall to keep their "tattle tale" device from being able to report anything back to Solid Oak. All I had to do is have the firewall tell me what was going on, and when I saw the tattle-tale system that existed in CyberSiter '97 try to get out, I merely told my firewall to block it.
That is why such monitoring systems would never work, without outlawing firewalls, otherwise people could defeat monitoring by blocking it with their firewalls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Greed
People who have and insist on enforcing this "It's MINE!" attitude only hurt themselves in the long run. The RIAA has enforced this attitude with vengeance in recent years and what has it gotten them? A fast trip into the tank for CD sales. Suing your customers is no way to drum up business. You'll only drive them off. I for one will not touch anything with an RIAA label on it.
Read the article! Brazil allows sharing and their music business is prospering. The claims of business lost to sharing made by the RIAA and MPAA are grossly exaggerated and vastly inflated and everybody knows it. First off sharing gives valuable exposure, which helps to increase sales. Secondly those who download illegally probably wouldn't have bought the CD in the first place, so nothing was lost. And the entertainment industry is full of Luddites who have fought every new technology that has come along, making unsubstantiated claims that it is going to destroy their business, only to discover it opened up vast new areas of business when it was allowed.
Tying down the pressure relief valve on a steam engine will get you a quick trip to the hereafter, and likewise over-zealous enforcement of "rights" is only ultimately going to turn people against you and hurt your business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brasil's Reasons
2) Brasil has many poor people that need housing and to be educated, ect. By allowing ripping, their government is deprived of their fair share of revenue, via TAXES. If you are a person of faith, you may want to re-read Mark 12:17 "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
Now, please tell us again about your real-world experiences with record labels...
Oh wait, you don't have any.
You're talking out of your anus again.
Silly me, I forgot that you're a meaningless, worthless no-contribution-to-society-whatsoever leech that goes on pirate forums espousing retarded rationalizations for his illegal and amoral behavior in feeding his incurable content addiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
And naturally, you want that to continue. I can understand, I'm sure you would have wanted for vinyl to continue too if it made you money. Government intervention and all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
And AC #48, most artists never making anything off of CD sales, as has been well established time and again. The labels take everything and go out of their way to make certain most bands will never recoup. So your arguments are flawed and incorrect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
Frankly, I don't believe you, at least not if you're talking about royalties from record sales.
According to the labels themselves, 90% of musicians on major labels are "unrecouped." Until they are "recouped," they will never see any royalties from record sales. And this figure has been quoted for decades - even in the late '90's and early 2000's, when the major labels were making more than they had been in their entire history.
Now, artists may see royalties from other sources, especially if they're a songwriter as well as a performer. Mechanical royalties, for instance - but those are paid when the recordings are manufactured, not when they're sold. Royalties from terrestrial radio or SoundExchange are also not dependent upon record sales.
You also don't usually get royalties (or own any part of the recording) if you're a session musician; you get paid "union scale."
So, about the only way you could be telling the truth, is if you're a record producer who gets "record one" royalties - royalties off of every record sold, regardless of whether the album is recouped or not. Only "superstar" producers get record one royalties, and I somehow doubt that you're Quincy Jones.
Of course, that's for artists in America, so the other possibility is that you're a foreigner. However, from the very little I've been able to dig up from the websites of ECAD and ABPD, things work the same way in Brazil.
Silly me, I forgot that you're a meaningless, worthless no-contribution-to-society-whatsoever leech that goes on pirate forums espousing retarded rationalizations for his illegal and amoral behavior in feeding his incurable content addiction.
No, he's not a record label executive. What on Earth gave you that idea?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
Given Karl's numerous points, could you at the very least suggest what kind of royalties you got? Were they for record sales on a recouped album? Or for something else?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
Now now, let's not be hasty. Let's assume that this guy is telling the truth.
If so, he's one of the VERY few musicians who has been able to earn any money whatsoever from record sales. This is quite a rare bird; we should listen to what he says. After all, I am an artist, and many of my friends are artists, and whatever we can do to earn a living off of music will be welcome (since most of us don't under contract).
So, tell us, my friend. How is it that you got royalties from record sales, when zero percent of my friends (even those on a major label) managed to do so? You obviously are a smarter businessman than the folks I know, so we would all be very grateful for a primer.
Details, please. I'd like to think that you're actually telling the truth, and have found that golden ticket which allows you to collect royalties from record sales. Or are you just a douchebag who is wasting everyone's time? It would be very disappointing if you were.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brasil's Reasons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Brasil's Reasons
So I buy a CD and rip it to my computer so I can transfer it to my iPod, allowing me to enjoy my paid-for music anywhere I want. Explain to all of us exactly how that deprives anybody of anything.
Also note that ripping, pirating and bootlegging are three quite different activities, and the article is only about ripping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Commie Clampdown
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilma_Rousseff
One of her dirt bag cohorts has already resigned due to "illegally enriching himself through consulting contracts". Rousseff, as a Commie, is in Control Mode and working with the RIAA, MAFIAA and any other Central Control Model organization, it's in her blood.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]