Correct, you can record off the radio for your own personal use but you cannot distribute that recording. Cassette tapes actually had a surcharge on them to pay for this. Blank CDs for audio recording also had this tarrif on them. That is why the old audio recorders would not work with computer blanks. I believe this has gone away as it was a futile attempt as CD recorders in computers became the norm.
There is a big difference between recording off the radio and downloading a digital copy of the song from an illegal download site. There are plenty of legal sites that actually pay the artist per track like iTunes. You cannot buy a CD, rip it and create a website to distribute those tracks which is basically what some sites have done. That IS stealing. Your purchase entitles you to listen to those tracks on your personal devices. You can even make a backup of the CD to safeguard your purchase but you must store one copy. Legally you cannot have a copy in your truck while your wife listens to a copy in the kitchen. A lot of us do that anyway but that does not make it right.

 

Only if the band has given permission to do so. Most concerts do not allow taping. The ones that do will publish a disclaimer or other restrictions. Sometimes it is printed on the back of the tickets. The Grateful Dead welcomed tapers and even allowed connections to soundboards at some shows and they also encouraged sharing. Some bands only allow taping for your personal use not for redistribution.

 

Oh, so if you sell me your bike, I can't let my friend ride it unless you get paid a surcharge? Whether that's actually considered legal or not right now, it shouldn't be. That's out and out greed, and I have the right to do whatever I want with what I bought as long as it isn't killing anyone else.

 

Some bands are greedy, some bands are not. No matter what, at some point in time, you will run across d-bags who think that they can't let you walk away without getting every single penny from you that they can.
A lot is going to change in the future with the laws regarding this.

 

Yep, but when you pay to go see them in concert, they'll play songs that were written and recorded by other people, some they have went through legalities to have the rights to the song (if they recorded it), some they don't. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

Intellectual property is different. You do not "own" the CD or the legally downloaded file, you have only bought the license to use it as per the applicable licensing agreement.

It would be like "renting" the bike permanently for a one-time payment - and the rental contract doesn't allow you to let others ride it.

 

I didn't sign crap when I bought my cd, there's nothing on there that says it's just intellectual property and I can't let anyone else listen to it. I didn't have any licensing agreement with Wal-Mart or wherever I bought it. When I buy a book, I can let others read it.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. Any time you see a band at a concert who covers a song that is owned by someone else, the person who owns that song is paid royalties. ASCAP sees to that.

You seem to have a serious problem understanding intellectual property rights, somehow associating it with tangible items (like your bike, which says a lot) and attributing the same ownership rights to them. I guessing that, like so many of today's retarded youth, you figure that once an idea or performance is performed and out there, it's been paid for fully and is then free for the taking. You couldn't be more wrong and clearly have no idea how much money and effort is invested to produced said works. (I'm not even going to touch on such things as software because that is clearly beyond your comprehension).

You also seem to have an issue with what you have incessantly referred to as greedy bastards and the like. That, in concert with your lack of knowledge about intellectual property rights, says to me that you are someone who earns their living through labor, and god bless you for that. Nothing wrong with that. But it screams that you somehow feel a victim of some sort of injustice that there are people who make a living through their talent that does not involve manual labor. It shows in your disrespect towards artists and management who are involved in such work and your assuming they are somehow greedy for actually wanting to be paid for their efforts.

I know you think that people who make their living this way somehow are paid repeatedly, ad infinitum, for doing only one thing whereas you get a check once a week and that's it? If so, you couldn't be more wrong.

Stealing a file, giving away something that doesn't belong to you, making repeated copies of something and disseminating it, watching or listening to something you didn't pay for or wasn't brought to you commercially through the advertising dollars of others is stealing. I know you don't see it that way. I know you don't believe it. But that's because you're clueless and have no idea how such works are created, and the massive cost involved.

What, you think every artist is rich? Every producer is rich? Not even close. Most are barely getting by. You're only aware of the successful ones. You also have no clue as to the massive infrastructure behind such endeavors. It is a business the scope of which is beyond your imagination.

So before you go mouthing off about how your stealing is not really stealing know this. You're an idiot, and based on your descriptions of how you watch movies, television, and listen to music , and "share" said works, you're a thief. You steal from me and others like me who make our livings via writing, music, film, television, et al.

You have no clue what you're doing but ignorance is not a defense.

I only hope that some day you go into business for yourself - or better yet, have a great idea and write a book, or a script or a song that you expect to get paid for - and have everyone steal from you, with the same ignorance as you do from people like me. And then I want to hear you tell me how it's no big deal.

 

Thank you for your opinion, but i don't think I'm an idiot, and I wouldn't consider myself youth. Since leaving my job in the music industry many years ago, I have done a lot of different kinds of work, not as much labor as you may think, but a lot of work in commerce. My brother, who is a musician signed to a major label and several other people agree with me. Now, if you are one of the greedy bastards, I understand why you're so upset at my point of view, otherwise I'm not really sure why you would be. I do understand, though, when there's not a valid response, jus get to calling the other party stupid and it will shift the focus. Listen, I go downtown, I buy a cd, I own it. I didn't buy any mythical idea of what is on it, I bought it. It's now mine. I'm holding it, that's tangible. Now, in a dream world, it's just for me, and I can't give it away or anything, but in the real world, like you greedy bastards will find out after the courts make a decisive ruling, I already paid for it, and I my do what I want with it. As far as royalties being paid for live covers? Well, that isn't true. Royalties are only due if it is re-recorded then sold. Otherwise, you've got a billion bands everywhere in the world that are "stealing" from you. So, I do know what I'm talking about, mister producer man, I'm fully aware of the sftware involved and the time and effort involved, and I think that once it is released and the publis has access to it, then they should have access to it, and if it sucks, then the people involved don't deserve paid any more for it than they have been. Good music doesn't have any trouble selling records, regardless of piracy. Plain and simple, if you suck, don't try to hide behind "intellectual property" to claim that you deserve to be paid as much as someone who doesn't suck. If you put out a single on the radio, and that entices me to buy your album, and the rest of the album is garbage, then who stole from who? I think people have a right to know for themselves what they are paying for before they give all the greedy bastards their hard earned money for something that sucks nuts. It is not the same for movies, because more often than not, you listen to the music exponentially more than you would watch the same movie over and over. It seems that I do not have the problem, it's half-azzed producers for crappy artists and crappy labels who feel like they have worked hard (and you may have, I have recorded, layered, exported, mixed and finalized several entire albums, even down to the instrument and mic placing at the point of recording) and deserve a paycheck even if the end result blows. You make a good single, you deserve money for your single, you don't deserve 15 bucks for the other 11 songs on the album that suck *****, I don't care how hard you worked on them, and moreover, and here's the point (although a different point of view is hard to see when you're so far up on your pedistal with your head up your own azz), I deserve to know firsthand whether or not it sucks before I give you my 15 bucks. You may not agree, but I wouldn't either if I was a greedy bastard.
And what's wrong with the way I watch tv and movies? I pay my bills for Directv and Netflix every month. Oh, wait, you didn't get a cut of that money, and it's something you thought of, so I must be stealing from you. Get off of your high horse, don't suck and don't be a part of sucking and you'll get paid, like you said, it's talent based. If you suck and I avoided paying you for sucking because I checked it out first, good! If I check it out and you don't suck, then I'm buying. I'm all for test-driving your intellectual property, especially if it keeps me from getting raped by some d-bag who feels creative one day but actually sucks *****.

 

I have had the same experience with DirecTV. Was a good service until I cancelled. I'll just say that I will never use them again.

 

would you people keep it in readers digest form? who wants to read over 200 words of pissyness you coulda covered in 75 words

 

Piracy is stealing no matter how you justify it. If you buy a CD you do not own the music on it. You cannot redistribute that music. It is for your personal use only. If you believe otherwise you are wrong. Plain and simple. You cannot rip the CD and give all the songs to your friends or post them on a website for people to download. If you think you can you are an idiot and a thief. Ignorance of the law does not excuse the crime. You could let your friend borrow your CD to listen to it but if he rips it he is also stealing from the artist not you.

 

So you are good with China buying 1 copy of something made in the US, and doing what ever they want with it ?

China also does not believe in any mythical idea of what is on/in it, They bought it, it's now theirs.

Even if they are not selling it, giving it away for free keeps the money out of the US companies hand ( which leads to a list of follow on issues ).

 

I'm willing to bet that Chuck D, Steve Winwood, the entire band Heart and 50 cent know a lot more about the industry than any of us here, so whether I am an idiot or not, I don't think they are when it comes to filesharing. They support it, and it's their music that is being "stolen".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Feb28.html
http://torrentfreak.com/50cent-file-...rtists-071208/
Also, the "retarded youth", aka Harvard University PhD students have found that for the bottom 75% of artists, filesharing has boosted their record sales.
http://torrentfreak.com/why-most-art...t-from-piracy/
Don't argue with just me, argue with the artists themselves and experts who have done years of study on this.
Norm, it seems that those artists and countless others do not think I am an idiot and a thief. They support this.
SSCULLY, I have been a session musician for a long time, I have recorded my own music countless times, and I have produced other people's music countless times. I have never charged or made a penny. If it were my job, and my job is talent-based, I would expect to be paid because people supported me and wanted to buy my product, not because I felt like they owed me because I worked so hard for it, even though it sucked and they had no idea what they were buying.
If I hear a band I like, I will buy their cd. If I hear a band that sucks, they aren't getting a dime from me. It's the absolute definition of talent-based, and it's not just me, Harvard says I am correct, as do the artists themselves. So now Steve Winwood is an idiot about the music industry? Ann and Nancy Wilson idiots? I think they've worked on it and been immersed in it longer than any of us here.
Greed is a killer. If you work in a talent-based business, have talent, and you will do fine. If you don't, then maybe talent-based businesses aren't for you. Ripping off people because they bought a product of yours that they absolutely hate and then calling it "intellectual property" is pure greed and BS. Glad that a lot of the artists themselves agree, even if the people who are lacking at gaining enough fans to make any money do not.

 

OK, so you have a hobby at music, and you feel you are able to comment on people that do it for a living. Good, I have a hobby about trucks, I guess it is just plain greed that dealers charge for work ?
Called making a living.

The remainder is just bypassing the question I asked, just more of how you feel your hobby relates to people that do it for a living.