Comment It depends (Score 2, Insightful) 113
I read a little bit about the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA), and came up with the following relevant bits (from answers.com).
(1) It requires digital recorders to use the Serial Copy Management System (SCMS), which prevents digital dubbing beyond one generation (section 1002(a))
(2) Imposes a "royalty" on digital recorders (section 1004(a))
I don't know what the SCMS is, but I suppose if XM can show that it implemented some sort of SCMS system (or if it can demonstrate that the device is not able to transfer recorded information to another device -- preventing "beyond one generation" digital dubbing) AND that it tried to pay a "royalty" for each recorder sold, then it would have a case.
But if XM just marketed the recorder without any regard for the required "royalty", then sadly, the RIAA will probably win. I hope that is not the case, otherwise it could prove fatal to XM's existence.
As an aside, I haven't stolen music in years. Apple's iTunes, my XM subscription, and other listen-before-you-buy, instant-gratification, digital distribution mediums have caused me to buy more music in the last year or two than in all the other prior years combined. Unfortunately, until consumers care enough to actually boycott the industry, the RIAA can do whatever it wants. This is a capitalist society after all, we DO have the power. Do we choose to use it?
(1) It requires digital recorders to use the Serial Copy Management System (SCMS), which prevents digital dubbing beyond one generation (section 1002(a))
(2) Imposes a "royalty" on digital recorders (section 1004(a))
I don't know what the SCMS is, but I suppose if XM can show that it implemented some sort of SCMS system (or if it can demonstrate that the device is not able to transfer recorded information to another device -- preventing "beyond one generation" digital dubbing) AND that it tried to pay a "royalty" for each recorder sold, then it would have a case.
But if XM just marketed the recorder without any regard for the required "royalty", then sadly, the RIAA will probably win. I hope that is not the case, otherwise it could prove fatal to XM's existence.
As an aside, I haven't stolen music in years. Apple's iTunes, my XM subscription, and other listen-before-you-buy, instant-gratification, digital distribution mediums have caused me to buy more music in the last year or two than in all the other prior years combined. Unfortunately, until consumers care enough to actually boycott the industry, the RIAA can do whatever it wants. This is a capitalist society after all, we DO have the power. Do we choose to use it?
