Is it legal to download CDrip of a vinyl album?

Just curious, I own a lot of vinyl albums but can't properly transfer them myself - is it illegal to download the songs still?

Tough question...in a way.
In some countries it would be considered illegal (any download of music that has copyright is considered illegal in some countries).

But, personally (and under Dutch law which governs this forum), I don't think it would be illegal since you then already paid for the song's licences...

True... but if you but the album you also pay for the costs that where made to transfer the old recordings to a CD (possibly remastered). You are right that you own the customer rights of the songs on vinyl, but as the versions of the songs might differ, the version from CD would most likely (legally) be seen as a different version...

Just my 2 cents

This is actually interesting because BR mentions that he is unable to convert his vinyl himself. Therefore, the assumption is that he sends his vinyl to someone/someplace that is doing the reproduction for him. Apparently, it's easier for him to get the conversion via electronic methods, rather than by having a CD made and returned to him with the original vinyl.

Since reproduction for personal use (on vinyl) was not restricted in most countries, then it would stand to reason that the method of delivery would not a factor (tape, CD, and MP3 via download are all simply methods of receiving the transcription).

As long as he has a contract that specifically states that the vinyl is being provided simply for reproduction by the original owner and that no further reproduction is authorized, then the owner should be ok. If there is no such agreement, then there could be legal issues.

It's illegal to dowload a track and whether you have a vinyl/tape/wax cylinder/8track or SACD version has no bearing in this matter in the United States. There are actually two illegal acts going on. You may own the album, but you just licensed the right to listen to that album. You can copy the track or rip it as you say, to another form for personal use. But, don't try to give that copy away to your buddy, that's against the law. No matter how you try to do it. Even if your friend has the same album!

In order for BR to download a file it means someone has to upload it. If that person does not have the consent of the copyright owner, then it is an illegal copy. So one is uploading illegally and the other is downloading an illegal copy.

Here is a very interesting link that asks a lot of these thorny questions.

I don't know who is behind the site, but I think they know what they are talking about. At least in the United States.

Sure it's illegal- but is it really wrong? I don't think so. However, justice is blind as they say. I just read something the other day that said the legal system isn't designed to dole out justice. Merely it is there to settle disputes. I think that just about sums it up.

Hi ..
Dutch law governs this forum? Ha ha ... so we're all OK then .. we can all do what we
like! 8^)

Bags.

Crabby hit the nail on the head, I think. It's wrong .. if the material is covered by
copyright, to export any copied part from your person to another. I dont think you
are going to be on the RIAA hit-list somehow, doing some of your own albums .. and
who is going to take you to court for it? It's when you start flogging thousands on
eBay or at the local town "car boot" sales that you will "get your collar felt"
Surely, legal systems are in place to "enforce" the law ... whatever that is! : ))

Peace .... Bags

nevermind, read a little closer.

And what if I own the vinyl record, and I record it myself to a CD or alike?
Is it also illegal?
(I think someone once said that it's not illegal to make one backup copy for personal use or somehting like that... Does it apply to this?)
And, of course, what if I do some production stuff - like noise and click reduction, amplitude optimization and so on?

This is not illegal in the United States. This is how you can rip an album to play on an iPod or create a custom CD. They just get upset when you share. However, it would be interesting to know if copy protected "works" like the BMG album are not looked at the same way as the have Sunncomm protection that would have to be circumvented.

Gr8
This finally means that there is something I can do that I like doing, and I can learn something this way, and could be useful to me, and is legal...

hehe... in australia you're not even allowed to transfer an album you own to another form. you have to buy it again.

plus, there's now the AUS-USA free trade agreement which says we can't circumvent copy protection either (though that was implicitly illegal before, as we're not allowed to make a copy, let alone decrypt it). even timeshifting off the TV is illegal.

the funny thing is that iPods were the number 1 christmas gift this season, and there's no iTMS available to australians... doublethink in action here.

however, i'm all for ignoring laws that do no good for society at large (we're not talking record companies, but the public).

Hear, hear!

From the MPAA web sight (I know they deal with movies, but this applies to music as well);
"If I can make an audiocassette copy of a CD, or a VHS copy of a television broadcast, why shouldn’t I be able to make a copy of a DVD that I own?
Copyright law and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1984 "Betamax" decision provide for "fair use" of copyrighted material. For example, scholars and critics can quote lines from a book in a review without fear of incurring copyright liability. Or, a soap opera fan can tape an over the air TV show during the day to watch later that night — under the Betamax decision, an unscrambled broadcast can be copied for this type of "time shift" personal use.

BUT "fair use" is not an open-ended concept. It does not justify any action an individual may take with a copyrighted work, whether they have purchased the copy or not. It is a right to use what is available, not a right of access to works for fair use purposes. For example, the law has always recognized that a show sent by scrambled pay-per-view signal may not be viewed or copied through the use of an unauthorized, illegal descrambler. The owner of the signal has – and has always had -- a legal right to scramble the signal to prevent unauthorized access to the signal for viewing or to make copies of the show.

Most importantly, this concept of fair use does not override specific statutory enactment such as the DMCA, which are intended by Congress to give clear protection to the rights of the creative community to use technological means to protect its product. It is this protection which has enabled the motion picture industry to launch new products in digital format, such as DVDs."

As I see it, it is a matter of access. Would you have to override or break a form of access control the owner of the copyright made a part of the package? For vinyl albums, no. You purchased the right to listen to those albums whether they are are on tape, cd, dvd, etc. You may transfer those songs "as is" to another medium and listen to them. You may allow other people to listen to them. You may not assume you have ownership of the artistic work and sell the artistic work as if you owned them but you may transfer ownership of the medium they reside on (which is how wholesalers, retailers, etc make their money-they are selling the cd medium for $14.99 and paying the artist/record company a fee for having the songs on there). Which basically means the owner of the copyright could choose to sue you if they thought you were profiting and did not pay them but the courts would have to determine your motivation and whether you violated the copyright owner's rights.
So you are within your rights to transfer the songs to another medium. As far as downloading them, they would need to be a 1:1 digital copy of the songs you had on your album, no DJ's allowed.

blah....

DMCA is full of holes and favors one side more than the other...it should never have been enacted/passed.

blah again to ANYTHING the RIAA and/or MPAA say...

blah blah blah....

this isn't a message of approval for piracy...simply a sentiment of disgust towards the RIAA, the MPAA, and most all major media conglomerates...

blah blah blah...get with the times...

this brings up a very interesting debate, since vynal, just like 8 track and cassete are anolog, they are not digital, and therefor do not apply the the dmca, only to normal copy right acts.

but, i think it might be legal, because you can rip a cd, and make a mix cd and not have a problem, so as long as you dont allow the song to be traded, you might be in the clear.

but it probally not

Beware as of January 5th 2005, all Australian Copyright laws were brought in line with the US DMCA act(it was part of the US FREE TRADE PACT, an interesting side benefit to the copyright holders of recorded music material was a free 20 year once off extension to the statuate of limitations of time ,without application by the copyright holder(this effectively realigns the Australian time limit to that of the US application)). If you carefully read the copyright notice, it is only legal to listen to the CD or LP in private and no commercial use is permitted! In this country, as the terms of the existing Australian Copyright Act exclude fair user rights period. Thus, if you have an extensive collection of old LP's unless the original copyright has expired and the item is now in public domain, it is illegal to convert the format to MP3/aac CD etc, even for personal use on your portable Ipod or MP3 player. As for retailers selling Ipods, a landmark common law case in the late 60's by a local well known identity Dick Smith, permit retail outlets to sell anything to the general public, that has not been precisely defined by Law as illegal (eg latest defined illegal substance in this country is the common garden fertilizer Ammonium Nitrate would you believe?). Some items may be legally sold, but under strict control laws apply. Ipod's are currently undefined! But then again, image what would happen to the Australian Local courts, if a total and absolute draconian enforcement against a million plus users of MP3's and Ipod users. As always, it is the end user, who is required to comply with all these increasing complex, meaningless,contradictory ill defined rules and regulations at all times,ignorance is not an acceptable defence!

Thank you for that information! But, it sure doesn't make sense to pass such stupid laws. But, I guess there is nothing we can do to fight it.

be smart and you won't get caught...stupid laws.

As the music industry charges different rates for the same music on different media, then in effect the user is paying for what they get. For example, while cassette tapes cost more than CDs to make these days, music on cassette tapes where still sold, are often much cheaper than the CD versions (at least here in Ireland). As a result, it seems the music industry charges their music based on what the sound quality would be like and I'm fairly sure they would treat the same for Vinyl.

Now, if the user is legally entitled to copy their music onto another medium, then even if the user copies their Tape or Vinyl to CD the actual quality would never be the same as an original CD version, although possibly close assuming they have a professional turntable or Tape deck and their tape or vinyl is in excellent condition.

However, if the user downloads a copy from the Internet or makes a copy of their friend's or neighbour's CD, then in effect they are getting a better copy than what they paid for. It is sort of like trying to replace an economy class plane ticket with a 1st class ticket to get a better quality flight on a given route.

but it's arguable which format has the "best" sound quality. vinyl is considered the best, even better than CD, since the "range" available is more true to the original recording (as opposed to digitized bytes). even 8-track tape is considered a higher quality (in some audiophile spheres) than CD.

well me personally i would say download em if u own em... cause legal or not... to me if u own a copy of the album u downloading, i dont see a problem with it.