Sony BMG Says Ripping CDs is Stealing

LKM writes "Sony seems to think we should not be allowed to rip CDs we own to our iPods. In fact, doing so is stealing, and we should all re-buy songs, preferably one copy for each device. Says Jennifer Pariser, the head of litigation for Sony BMG: 'When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song. Making a copy of a purchased song is just a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'.' I guess somebody should tell Sony about all the devices Sony produces that allow this stealing to occur!"

She continued her testimony saying...

I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit!

Re:She continued her testimony saying...

In the land of the 6 foot hairless apes, the 8 foot wookie is still king.

Re:She continued her testimony saying...

Especially if you beat them at Space Chess.

Re:She continued her testimony saying...

I think I read on wikipedia somewhere that he sublets a place there for extended visits. But he probably doesn't live there enough to qualify as a resident for legal and tax purposes.

Re:what bothers you about that joke

Dude, South Park never makes fun of people based on their race, ethnicity, social status, or sexuality. Please, let's not sling mud.

Oh, and wooooooo, season premiere tonight!

Suppositions

Says Jennifer Pariser, the head of litigation for Sony BMG: 'When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song.

When an individual makes a statement like that, I suppose we can say that person is completely out of their moldy gourd.

Re:Suppositions

Now they're just trying to look like asshats. Before this we could almost give them the benefit of the doubt, but now...... nope.

Re:Suppositions

I think that's the purpose of releases like this, to make the previous unreasonable statements look like acceptable alternatives.

We should actually draw the line in the sand and tell the entire RIAA to get bent.

Re:Suppositions

...and tell the entire RIAA to get bent.

OK, I'm tired of this line. If you don't like RIAA's tactics, don't buy CDs from their record labels. It's easy. I've been using RIAARadar to not support RIAA labels since Napster went dark; and it's not like you miss much good music.

what I'm saying is that it's BEEN time to let the RIAA twist in the wind, and I really, really hope I'm preaching to the choir. Being a /. reader and continuing to buy RIAA-tainted CDs is basically inexcusable.

Re:Suppositions

I'm tired of that line. It doesn't matter if everyone stops buying music from RIAA companies. They'll still get all the royalties from radio, store music, and other places where compulsary license fees are collected. It is the law. They'll also amp up their lawsuits, DMCA complaint bots, and lobbying stating "piracy" is the cause of their decreased sales.

It doesn't matter if you don't broadcast or listen to their music, a false DMCA complaint will still take your site down. You will still have to hire a lawyer if they try to sue you because you wrote a communications app which may be able to transport music or generic files, some of which could be music. You will still be screwed if they pass a DRM law which requires all computers to run (Microsoft's) DRM system and you are not allowed to write software unless you buy some expensive key--assuming they will let you buy it at all. After all, if you are an open source coder, you must be "untrustworthy"

Even boycotting them, they still get money and they still continue with their insane behavior. That is not the end all solution.

Re:Suppositions

Aren't these people supposed to go through their PR department before they're let loose on the public with their wild rantings?

Re:Suppositions

Nope, because they don't see any possible issues with what they're saying. Take this wonderful example from NBC/Universal's counsel.

"NBC/Universal general counsel Rick Cotton suggests that society wastes entirely too much money policing crimes like burglary, fraud, and bank-robbing when it should be doing something about piracy instead."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070615-copyright-coalition-piracy-more-serious-than-burglary-fraud-bank-robbery.html?bub [arstechnica.com]

I think the best way to view these people is to imagine what happen if someone from the distant past were to come in to our time. For example, Jews from 1000BC or a Kansas school board from 2006. Both groups would have some bizarre views of the world, probably arguing with passion that heliocentrism and evolution are totally false. They may even advocate burning at the stake for people consorting with evil by using post-it notes or computers.

The legal counsel and the PR departments of these record companies face a similar handicap, in that they can't possible adjust to our time. We need to develop a time machine so we can return them to a time they understand

Re:Suppositions

Now take those out-of-time backwards people, and propose to them the notion that they cannot legally publicly perform a traditional, popular, well-known song without paying someone for the privilege. They'd probably all consider that asinine and offensive.

Yep, that's a classic of people disregarding a silly law, quite correctly in my opinion. I've no problem with the song being protected for a reasonable period of time, but the idea that a song written in 1935 should still be protected by copyright is a bit of a stretch.

Disk caches can be pretty big. Sometimes, when I wind back to the beginning of a track to hear it again, that entire track will be played from cache. Was that an illegal copy I just played?

Good example. Caches could probably be taken in to account when writing laws, but technology is changing too quickly. Either the laws will try to keep up, becomming horribly complicated in the process, or we need less restrictive laws in the first place. If copyright law in the UK simply allowed a reasonable level of fair-use, we wouldn't have found ourselves in a situation where many thousands of iPod/mp3 player/minidisc owners were unwittingly breaking the law just to listen to music that they purchased. Any law that regulates the behaviour of the average man needs to make sense to them. If the majority disregard the law or don't see why it should be there, then the law probably needs to be examined very closely to see exactly who it's serving.

Re:Suppositions

Now they're just trying to look like asshats

I really don't think they are trying any more. I think we can say they have mastered that just fine. Lets see, I have canned response to sony. I wrote it down on an index card, just a second let me get it. Okay here it is..

..."Fuck You!"...

Contact details

Tell Jennifer what you think of her - [phone]

http://pview.findlaw.com/view/1755781_1 [findlaw.com]

Re:Contact details

Boy, she sure wasn't happy when I told her she was a stupid litigious bitch... and then asked her on a date. She sounds hot. Honestly!

Re:Contact details

If the fear of goatse stops me from clicking on links, the terrorists have won.

It's a FAX

I don't know if they hooked up a fax machine because of the flood of calls, but please please, someone with a fax, send them something.

For extra points, tape several sheets together and write "We Will Not Purchase Music From Sony BMG Until You Change Your Position," feed it through the fax machine, tape the ends together so they receive never-ending protest message, take a picture of yourself doing it (not your face, of course), post it on imageshack.us, and share the joy with the rest of us.

You can do it. I know you can.

Re:It's a FAX

Three Words: Black Construction Paper.

Re:It's a FAX

No, better yet, the previous post's message, but written in white on black rather than vice-versa. Then you get the best of both worlds!

Re:It's a FAX

You may have found a practical use for goatse man.

Re:It's a FAX

You may have found a practical use for goatse man.

oh dear, you've done it now. Who knew rule 34 applied to faxes?

I wish I was able to see the look on the face of whoever reads those faxes.

Re:Suppositions

So that means the people who bought Sony MD Walkmans in the early 90's before file sharing was common place were supposed to buy a separate set of CDs for it? Did it say that anywhere on the box? No!

Re:Suppositions

Actually, the Sony software actually facilitates the copying of the CD to the Minidisc. Buying a second CD and copying those tracks would not suffice, because you're just copying CD number 2, which is still stealing, according to them. According to this statement, the only music you should be able to play actual pre-recorded minidiscs, which I don't even think are sold anymore. They even still sell Minidisc players [sonystyle.ca], which from what I can tell, don't even support any DRM'd media formats, and can pretty much only play music which has been ripped from CD, or re-encoded from non-protected formats.

Not news.

Remember, there is a difference between Sony's hardware division that makes stuff that plays music, and Sony's music division that signs artists, and distributes music.

The hardware people are reasonable, they want their stuff to be able to play everything, and record everything, and they want it to work 100% of the time.

The music people just want you to buy their stuff over and over and over. They don't care if you EVER listen to it.

It's a big corporation, and all the parts aren't always working in the same direction, so don't throw down on the people who make stereo equipment, and the DVD-W's you're using to flawlessly copy movies, just because the music people are douchebags.

Re:Not news.

It's a big corporation, and all the parts aren't always working in the same direction, so don't throw down on the people who make stereo equipment, and the DVD-W's you're using to flawlessly copy movies, just because the music people are douchebags

Umm... no thats the exact reason to "throw down" on those people who make stereo equipment with contradiction to what the douchbags at Sony BMG say. These asshats need to be leashed in and one way is totally holding the rest of the corporation accountable. When they don't have their head up their asses, they reply to one thing, and one thing only: money.

Speak with your wallets and speak to the shareholders; across the board.

Sony execs should be self-policing their other divisions, period.

Re:Not news.

The hardware people are reasonable, they want their stuff to be able to play everything, and record everything, and they want it to work 100% of the time.

Ahh.. so that's why they always invent their own formats for cassettes, memory sticks, interconnectors, etc... Or wait, no, I'm confused now.

Re:Not news.

Remember, there is a difference between Sony's hardware division that makes stuff that plays music, and Sony's music division that signs artists, and distributes music.

I'm not up on all this stuff, so could you tell me which Sony company [yahoo.com] makes money off hardware and which is the entertainment company, so that I can refuse to do business with the idiot corporation but still support the slightly less idiotic one? Because if you can't, in my opinion, that's exactly like giving me money to put in the checking account I share with my wife, but not liking her and refusing to give any money to her. It all ends up in the same place and will be distributed among the same people.

Re:Suppositions

but then again, half of all lawyers graduate in the bottom half of their class

Is this true??? We must do something to improve the quality of lawyers! Also I'm trying to figure out why 40% of sick days are taken on Mondays and Fridays, but that's another issue.

Re:Sony is not welcome in my wallet...

Sony probably thinks that is stealing too. They are contacting the politicians they own right now to create a law making it illegal not to buy their products.

Re:Sony is not welcome in my wallet...

Sony probably thinks that is stealing too. They are contacting the politicians they own right now to create a law making it illegal not to buy their products.

We can laugh about this, but isn't that really what a media tax is? A fine for NOT buying the copyright material through normal channels? (Additional burden - assumption of guilt: you pay the fine on media that MIGHT be used to hold a copy of copyrighted material. If you use the media for data, or even as a coaster, you still pay that "fine".

Record companies want it both ways in Canada

The record companies lobbied here in Canada for a levy on blank media for years. They got it in 1999, and in return, consumers got the right of Private Copying. Actually, this deal favors most consumers, because we are permitted to copy music from any source for our own use; I can take CDs out of the library or borrow them from you and make my own copies, and it's entirely legal up here. The record companies would like you to think that you can only copy on to media subject to the levy, but a close reading of the Copyright Act disproves this view.

A couple of years ago, though, I saw a Norah Jones CD at POS in a Chapters store, and it looked interesting until I saw on the back that it was encumbered with anti-copying technology. I wrote the record company (BMI IIRC) and asked how it is, on the one hand, that they are happy to take my levy money in return for private copying, and on the other hand, that they're attempting to block my copying? The letter challenged them to either give up their portion of levy revenue or drop copy protection. Their response was that the levy "does not begin" to offset losses due to private copying and therefore they had the right to copy-protect. (This whole discussion didn't even touch on whether such copy protection had any chance of working).

There are few industries that think they should get money (levy revenue) in return for something (private copying rights), and then not deliver (copy-protect the media). These companies have successfully exploited both consumers and artists for far too long, and deserve to be totally cut out of the producer-consumer transaction.

So I guess everyone was stealing...

...when they were making mix tapes back in the 80's? If copying is copying then I don't see the difference...

Re:So I guess everyone was stealing...

According to the new rules of the corporate culture, we are stealing every time we expect some product or services for our money. We're stealing when we expect to use an iPhone the way we want to use it. We're stealing when we assume "unlimited" bandwidth means "unlimited" bandwidth. We're stealing when we borrow a book from the library or from friend. We're stealing when we pay for health insurance and then actually use it. We're stealing when we expect the government to do something useful with our tax money like provide health care to children instead of providing security services to oil companies in Iraq.

We're supposed to shut up and pay.

Re:So I guess everyone was stealing...

According to the new rules of the corporate culture, we are stealing every time we expect some product or services for our money. We're stealing when we expect to use an iPhone the way we want to use it. We're stealing when we assume "unlimited" bandwidth means "unlimited" bandwidth. We're stealing when we borrow a book from the library or from friend. We're stealing when we pay for health insurance and then actually use it. We're stealing when we expect the government to do something useful with our tax money like provide health care to children instead of providing security services to oil companies in Iraq.

We're supposed to shut up and pay.

And the surprise is?

This is what happens when companies are allowed to make the laws. Most corporations have one goal: Make more money. The higher price and more times you pay for the same product, the better. Capitalism can be good, competition is the best, but it needs to be regulated, as has been proven time and time again.

When all the major record companies "agreed" on using lots of cash on DRM and MAFIAA, they knew that they were going to screw their customers. But they also knew that people wouldn't stop buying music. But this is where they stepped wrong. RIAA can't stop piracy, and DRM can't either.

Now they are making more and more desperate statements (like the example in this article), to try to compensate. Fortunately it won't help, and they will at last be forced to listen to their customers. DRM-free music is getting more popular every day, and the music industry will soon realize that they have to follow that example.

Let this be a warning for all corporations, that eventually they will get burned if they screw with their customers.

Re:So I guess everyone was stealing...

Not Bizarro World at all. More complex regulation usually translates into 'loopholes'. Not to mention, once you start getting complicated with the regulations, you're more likely to see corporate shills writing the regulations to put even more loopholes that you could drive a mac truck through; assuming you have the money to hire a modest staff of lawyers and accountants to pull of the tricks.

To make your example a little more realistic - it'd be like reducing traffic accidents by simplifying the road system. Eliminate five & six way intersections, for example. Go to on-ramps and limited access/exits for highways. Don't have a lot of varying speed limits in a given length of road. Some will disagree with me, but going to traffic circles rather than red lights or stop signs can reduce accidents.

As for laws, you'd be looking at eliminating stuff like requiring hand signals for turns, having a person walking before the car holding a torch and ringing a bell. Honking your horn before making a turn. Stuff like that.

Sony is once again being EVIL.

But,
What about the people that do get hurt by piracy? What about the people that make money from it?
No I am not talking about MP3 player manufactures or CDRW producers. There was a story on Slashdot about a site that was full of pirated eBooks. There received a take down notice that caused a lot of problems because.
1. It invoked the DMCA for no valid reason.
2. It included one work that was published under Creative Commons.
The up roar over those errors what loud and I feel justified. However no one pointed out that the site did have many ebooks that did violate the authors copyright. Also that site was in the process of raising venture capital and was selling ads. That site is in it for the money just like the publishers.
So we have several groups.

We have the media companies. They are big and vile. They want total control over all media and don't really care about the consumer or the artists rights.

We have the pirates. I will restrict this to the those that are into it for the profit. They are acting like fences. They don't actually break any
copyrights they just help those that do connect up with the people that want the material and make a profit doing it. Oh they will often wrap themselves with the freedom banner but the truth is they are in it for the money.

We have the artists and the authors. They are getting ripped off by both the media companies and the pirates.

You have the hackers and users. They want to use the media they buy any way they want to. It should be completely legal for iTunes or any other software to rip DVDs so people can play them on their computers and media players! Bit Torrent isn't a pirates tool anymore than a sheet of paper is a counterfeiters tool.

As the end user of media we are not hurt by the pirates but we are hurt by DRM and are offended by the erosion of our rights by the media companies. We tend to side with anyone that is against the media companies. But the truth is people do deserve to be paid for their work. It is just as wrong to violate the copyright on a book as it is to violate the GPL. Authors and Artists have the right to be paid for their work. Just as we have the right for fair use. And the DMCA, DRM, RIAA, and MPAA are NOT THE SOLUTION they are if anything a huge part of the problem. DRM makes pirated media easier to deal with than legal media.

If course I wonder when the video companies will realize that bit torent is a small leak in their dike, the flood is NetFlix.