RIAA Claims Ripping CDs for Personal Use is Illegal

http://www.switched.com/2007/12/11/riaa-claims-ripping-cds-for-personal-use-is-illegal/?ncid=NWS00010000000001

[QUOTE=CCRomeo;1951750]http://www.switched.com/2007/12/11/riaa-claims-ripping-cds-for-personal-use-is-illegal/?ncid=NWS00010000000001[/QUOTE]
Can’t they find anything better to do? :rolleyes:

/me blows biggest razzberry ever at the RIAA :stuck_out_tongue:

Scraping the bottom of the barrel now, I see. :rolleyes:

Haha what a joke, with more publicity and the more they piss people off the worse they make it.

Years ago they screwed up by not embracing digital downloads and won’t lower prices what do they expect…

It looks to me like they are saying only the purchaser has the right to use/copy a CD. If that person is part of a household then each family member needs to buy their own copy? My God, where will they go next. If you even listen to a CD at a friend’s house you should pay for the disc first? Record companies can’t go belly up fast enough for me.

when will it end :rolleyes:

[Addendum: Looks like the RIAA has also included language about the fact that the Howells put their files on file sharing networks, which could give the RIAA a leg to stand on here. That said, this case remains interesting due to the language the RIAA is including regarding one’s rights to rip his own CDs.]

looks like I’m breaking teh RIAAs madeup laws too because I have my CDs ripped to one comp and share the folder across my home network so I can listen on any of my PCs, which I bet is exactly what they were doing since they don’t mention P2P :doh:

I bet that if the RIAA quit with all the insane lawsuits they would make more money because they wouldn’t be paying for all the massive legal fees

The second paragraph of the article best sums it all up:

“The audacity of the RIAA’s claim wouldn’t be too surprising, given its penchant for overzealous attacks of digital media, if it weren’t in direct contradiction of arguments made by RIAA lawyers in a case filed in 2005. In the case, [U]MGM Vs. Grokster[/U], representation from the RIAA explicitly said that making digital copies of music for personal use was protected.”

That’s precedent and on the books, and solely on that basis the lawsuit should be dismissed with prejudice and the RIAA ordered to pay court costs AND the defendant’s court costs. Period.

News flash:
RIAA deems any content heard by any non-purchaser to be public broadcast and therefore in violation of the agreement.

Can you say “Spiral of Death”?
How about “Crash & Burn”?

I bet it’s a real blow that they can’t keep copyright of a DEAD ARTISTS music beyond 50 years and hence use the 100% pure profit to fund their legal team.

Our descendants will look back at the RIAA & see them, and laugh at them , for the clowns they are. This circus has gone on for long enough. It’s not funny any more.