August 30, 2006 3:36 PM PDT
RIAA copyright education contradictory, critics say
- Related Stories
-
Studios, RIAA target student piracy
April 27, 2006 -
File-swapping leaders nearing D-day
February 1, 2006 -
End of an era for file-sharing chic?
August 25, 2003
The Consumer Electronics Association and Public Knowledge are among the groups to issue a joint statement condemning some statements on the Recording Industry Association of America's video, which the RIAA has plans to distribute to the nation's universities.
The RIAA's video, a copy of which can be found on its Web site, suggests that students should be skeptical of free content and that it's always illegal to make a copy of a song, even if it's just to introduce a friend to a new band, said Robert Schwartz, general counsel for the Home Recording Rights Coalition, one of the groups opposed to the video.
The RIAA has feuded often with groups representing companies, such as CD-burner manufacturers, that have a stake in music sharing. They claim the music industry tramples over the rights of individuals as it fights music piracy. The RIAA has aggressively litigated against people who share music files on the Web for the past several years. The RIAA's strategy now is to launch a campaign to educate young people of the consequences they face when they download music illegally.
"First, we were told we should not enforce our rights," said an RIAA representative responding to critics of the video. "Now we are told education is wrong, too. We won't accept such a do-nothing approach. We'll continue to work with respected higher-education groups to engage students to think critically about these issues."
The RIAA says that more than 350 universities have expressed interest in the video.
In the RIAA's seven-minute video, the narrator attempts to explain copyright law and some of the other hazards with downloading music from the Web, such as being sued or arrested. At one point, the narrator tells viewers it's okay for them to make a copy for themselves "as long as it's for you."
"Making copies for your friends, or giving it to them to copy, or e-mailing it to anyone is just as illegal as free downloading," the video narrator says.
This appears to contradict a statement made in the Frequently Asked Question section that accompanies the video, Schwartz claims.
An FAQ-section question asks whether someone who has bought music has the right to ever upload or download music. The RIAA's answer says that it's okay for productive or scholarly works. The video's critics say the response makes no mention of allowable uses for home recordings, even for individual use, which the law allows.
"The RIAA seems to be making up the rules instead of citing any consistent interpretation or precedent as to the law," Schwartz said.
See more CNET content tagged:
RIAA,
critic,
education,
copyright law,
university
Dell 15" Laptop Deals
Share and share alike!!!
And how, exactly, are we supposed to do that if every CD has copy protection schemes up the wazoo?
courts and now in our classrooms. The only thing the RIAA is doing
is leaving a bad taste in everyone's mouth over the whole music
industry. And they wonder why CD sales are down..
I knew the RIAA was out of touch, but...
wrong.
Let the RIAA and MPAA rot.
Doesn't it make more sense to explain the whole process of how music is made and why it's important to pay for the music you listen to? Doesn't that make more sense. I think you'll get more of a response from young people wanting to support their favorite musical artist that way. Simply telling them, "Buy your music or go to jail" makes them want to rebel against the establishment and do the opposite. It makes the RIAA look like the bad guys.
This should be required reading for everyone who wants to access
the internet (and especially for anyone who wants to CONTROL it):
http://worldofends.com/
http://www.campusdownloading.com/faq.htm
While IANAL, I have spent too much time working with them on contracts.
What I notice is that the RIAA's lawyers are attempting to mislead consumers by saying things that in the context of their FAQ are patently wrong, however outside of the context of the FAQ are correct.
Take the following:
-=-
Doesn?t the "Fair Use doctrine" give me the right to download and upload copies of music I?ve purchased?
No, it doesn?t. In certain instances, the use of a copyrighted work for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research might not constitute infringement, depending on (1) the purpose and character of the use, (2) the nature of the copyrighted work, (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work has a whole, and (4) the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. However, courts have rejected the notion that uploading and downloading copyrighted sound recordings without permission constitutes "fair use."
-=-
Points 1-4 are correct when talking about the fair use doctrine when it pertains to using copyrighted works within an educational context. However, their last statement, while technically correct, in context of the FAQ is wrong.
The fact that the last statement is extremely general and is taken out of context, is very disturbing....
For using intimidation and extortion for $3200 a person per offense. And likely for entrapment and seeding the internet with trojans, spyware and malware to track and thus actually induce the very problem they are trying to sue for.
The music industry missed the boat on music downloads and instead of being innovative, they resort to using the legal system to protect their greed. They are saying to teens, the internet is communism. Repent!
The RIAA is so full of Crap and has totaly gone OVER the legal line and this Education is a way to cover there butts. However after viewing the Previews I can say ALOT of the information is Typical of RIAA and MPAA as its not 100% true.
Many Artist and Entertainers are so fed up with this Money Hungry group, they are starting to take the Consumers side in these issues. I think someone needs to Educate everyone on what the RIAA is, does, can do and has the authority to do.
(Take a visit to http://ascap.org )
I can say as a member of ASCAP I hold partial Copyrights to a handfull of songs like other composers, songwriters and publishers do. In some cases I hold Copyrights and NOT the artist, however many Artist do hold them as well.
What continues to baffle me and **** me off is RIAA DOES NOT hold Copyrights to ANYTHING Directly other than the "Recording" that the Member Record Company may own. This is one of the many reasons ANY ARTIST rolls there eyes when they hear the RIAA Claim they are looking out for Our interest.
ASCAP and several Artist have also been involved in litigation over Copyright issues however settlements have usually been what most call Fair.
There actions of mass and unfounded litigation is coming to a slow halt since most recent Court Cases have been dismissed and many Judges have started throwing the book at RIAA. This I think is why they are pushing the Education issues now or as I call it MisEducation.
YES us songwriters and Artist do loose money but the RIAA has been stealing from us for years.
I hope this helps show just how Dishonest and Contradictory the RIAA is and has been for years.
{i do not expect any replies to this post as its part venting and part information)
- These guys...
-
by chuck_whealton
September 5, 2006 6:12 PM PDT
- The RIAA is so greedy it's not even funny. Every time a new
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 33 Comments >>media type comes out (i.e. - 45, LP, 8-Track, Casette, CD, etc.)
these guys (the record labels) make tons more money from the
same people buying the same songs on different media.
It's ridiculous.
Now that there is technology to allow us to transport our legally
purchased music to different formats without having to pay
them for it yet again, they're angry. How horrible for them.
They may only get paid once for the music - as it should be. I'm
not shocked that they'de omit the facts.
Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com