|
Phoenix
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con.../article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.htmlIn 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. So now, according to the RIAA, if you've ever transferred a song from a CD to your computer, you're a filthy criminal and need to be punished. I remember when this went on over home VCR recording of television broadcasts, and cassette tape recordings of radio broadcasts. This has gone too far. What gives them the right to, after previously arguing the opposite in a prior case, suddenly say "oh, by the way, that's illegal because we say so" and make criminals out of millions of people? I was under the impression that only Congress could legislate, and that the Fair Use provision of copyright still applied. Apparently the RIAA wants to change the rules.
Not content with suing people who are file sharing because people are fighting back, they want to declare any electronic transfer of a song to be a copyright violation. Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but I think if you install a program from a CD onto a computer are you not duplicating a copyrighted work from a CD onto a computer hard drive? Well that just outlawed software installation if that flies. Oh wait, let's take this further. What about transferring data into electronic RAM? After all, that could be construed as copying too, so you can't listen to the music now either, nor even run your computer. Oh, and singing? No way! You're using their copyrighted material in an unauthorized manner, and defaming the artist with your pathetic attempts at copying their work in an inferior manner and attempting to reproduce it in a volatile fluid storage medium (air). In fact, if you've ever heard a song, you probably remember part of it, which means you're guilty of no less than three violations! First you've played it, thereby copying parts of the song into electronic RAM in the playback device, second, copying that into a volatile fluid storage medium, and third, you heard the song so you've again copied it into a biological electrochemical storage medium (brain). You better just give up and pay them the money in whatever amount they wish. In fact, even if you've not heard any songs, you should pay them the money in advance because at some point you probably will and then you'll be a dirty crook like everyone else. Maybe it would be easier just to tax you from birth so that you can pay them all your life for every offense you'll commit and that way they will be justly recompensed for all your copyright violations you filthy criminal. Then again, perhaps it would be best if you simply were never born, so why don't you all execute yourselves now and get it over with. It really would be less painful than trying to pay back all the fines for all the crimes you've committed. You also won't have to deal with a lifetime of guilt, knowing that by killing yourself you will have received the maximum possible penalty for your crimes. It really would be easier you know, but before you do, be sure to will them all your money and internal organs. You won't be needing them anyway and they can use the money to make even more songs that people can't ever listen to in any way, shape, or form.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
   
Posts: 3330
|
In fact, if you've ever heard a song, you probably remember part of it, which means you're guilty of no less than three violations! A had quite the chuckle @ that bit. But don't go giving them ideas.. ;] |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
I would like to take this time to remind EVERYONE that your rectum is not a good place to keep your head.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
The RIAA know that they're backing a loser, so they want to bend the rules as much as they can so that they can sue everyone. Music distribution has become very easy these days, so realistically no one NEEDS organizations like the RIAA, the BPI and so forth. Lawsuits are the only way they can stay afloat, when really what they should do is spork off and let the people MAKING the music handle their own business. It's worked for Radiohead so far.
Here in the UK, there are proposals to relax the laws regarding format conversion. Hopefully they'll be successful. Let's face it, CD's don't last forever.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
Lopson
Elite
Posts: 1133
Still Going In Circles
|
Let's face it, CD's don't last forever. Ofcourse not. But I certainly hope that music will stick to physical storage devices such as the DVD-A and the SACD (Super Audio CD) for the next few years, since the audio quality of these formats is exponentially better than the one of a MP3. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
Posts: 3330
|
Even those can get scratched, lost, stolen or burnt. A backup should always be a legal option, regardless of the quality of the carrier.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
|
fourier
|
I'm still waiting for the breathing taxes and fines...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
 What do you think all this talk about your carbon footprint is? That's what carbon taxes would do. O2 goes in, CO2 comes out, that's the definition of animal respiration. By the very act of breathing you're polluting the air, and they want to tax you for it. It's not just about people driving Hummers, but they don't tell you that part. They'll tax you on your car's emissions, next will come your electric bill, water usage, and how many people are in your household since the more people are there, obviously the more CO2 they're dumping into the atmosphere. I'm not kidding, there are organizations lobbying the UN for this sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
Posts: 3330
|
Personally I think it makes sense to tax or otherwise disincline people to use nonsensically fuelconsuming, polluting or hugetastic cars, like Hummers. Silly buggers wanting to tax breathing are, in typical political/bureaucratic style, taking it too far, and making fools of themselves -- and by extension of their more sensible ideas.
Not so off-topic, since this could easily lead you to become a tax evader. Crooks who breathe but don't pay.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sucutrule
|
N' I though people couldn't be more stupid.
Whats next? A tax for living? Because I obviously didn't design this endoeskeletal movement vehicle, so I have to pay a tax to God.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2007-12-31, 19:58 by Sucutrule »
|
Logged
|
How I am supposed to type will all this cheese laying around?
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
"When it gets too cold, I'll tax the heat
When you take a walk, I'll tax your feet
'Cos I'm the taxman
Yeah, I'm the taxman ..."
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
Lopson
Elite
Posts: 1133
Still Going In Circles
|
Not so off-topic, since this could easily lead you to become a tax evader. Crooks who breathe but don't pay. Oh man, that was funny! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Draco
|
lol there should be a tax for stupid people, because they are in fact a risk to society and to themself. thank god for california for putting a driving law prohibiting people driving with cell phones UNLESS they use it for a "hands free" device.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Rev 9:6 "And in those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will long to die, and death flees from them."
|
|
|
|
|
|
