PDA

View Full Version : Is it legal ?



Audio Al
17-08-2015, 15:44
Hi peps

Just a thought on this c op y legal side of things

If I buy a LP at a boot sale and pay cash I then become the owner of said recording and have also purchased some new blank tape ,

Is it l egal for me to c opy whatever tracks I want onto the new tape or is it a grey area

Notice the s pacing just in case someone is looking :D

Barry
17-08-2015, 15:48
If the tapes are solely for your own use, then I don't think it's a problem. If you give the tapes to someone else, then I think that constitutes a breach of copyright.

Paul Stewart is probably the best person to answer this.

struth
17-08-2015, 15:51
nope you are allowed to as a tax was added to price of tape to cover royalties. you are not allowed to sell one without the other. ie legally you sell the record you have to get rid of the tape.. not that anyone is going to give you any grief unless you go into business.. its technically the same with a flac file of a cd on your hdd

Rothchild
17-08-2015, 16:05
Less illegal than it used to be: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-copyright-law although I can't find any explicit reference to the format shifting issue in this lot right now, it's explained further here: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/31/uk-copyright-tweak-legally-rip-cds-ipod

You can't sell the tape and if you dispose of the record you're expected to destroy the tape (backup) too

(replace mp3with 'tape' and 'CD' with 'boot fair vinyl' and you get the idea...)

Just to add, you don't 'become the owner of said recording' (that's the whole point of copyright) what you own is a limited licence for replay under certain conditions (ie not public broadcast etc), for a long time America has had a 'fair use' clause which has meant that format shifting is more legal there but the UK only got an exception that allowed it last year.

I am not a lawyer etc etc.

EDIT: Anyway does no one know that home taping is killing music?!

walpurgis
17-08-2015, 17:07
I believe there were very recent changes to the law and seemingly now you can't legally record from a CD of copyrighted music even to use yourself. I'd imagine the same would apply to vinyl.

Not that it really matters. Nobody is going to give a bugger and folks will just carry on and record whatever they like and give copies to friends and family as usual :lol:!

It's just law for the sake of law, unenforceable and pathetic in concept.

Audio Al
17-08-2015, 17:25
These changes to copyright law affect how you can use content like:

books
music
films
photographs
They introduce greater freedom in copyright law to allow third parties to use copyright works for a variety of economically and/or socially valuable purposes, without the need to seek permission from copyright owners.

Protections for the interests of copyright owners and creators are built in to the proposed changes.

Thats interesting

PaulStewart
18-08-2015, 17:10
Legally due to the dogs breakfast of legislation from this and the previous (Labour) government, despite the fact that record companies and music publishers had accepted that people could copy, strictly for personal use. The current situation is that it is now illegal again. The blank media levy is an EU directive, not ratified by the UK so not charged here. It's a stupid situation, and the fact the IPO, Intellectual Property Office, have no concept of audio or visual recording methods, really hampers things.

As long as you have bought a licence by buying the physical media, I don't see the problem, but others seemingly do :(

PaulStewart
18-08-2015, 17:13
These changes to copyright law affect how you can use content like:

books
music
films
photographs
They introduce greater freedom in copyright law to allow third parties to use copyright works for a variety of economically and/or socially valuable purposes, without the need to seek permission from copyright owners.

Protections for the interests of copyright owners and creators are built in to the proposed changes.

Thats interesting

Sadly this is Bollocks capital B from the IPO. The new legislation screws copyright creators and was introdued at the behest of the world's largest copyright thieves...... Ladies and gentlemen welcome to Google world :steam:

Rothchild
18-08-2015, 17:32
Indeed, it would appear that having spent FIVE YEARS working out that it wasn't really a lot of bother to allow people to format shift a licence tied to a cd to a hard drive (or cassette) for private use, the musicians union brought a high court case and had the legislation repealed so it is still illegal to format shift music you own a licence for.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/if-youve-ever-copied-music-from-a-cd-to-your-ipod-you-might-be-breaking-the-law-10333903.html


The music biz has been having it both ways up for years, by not dealing with the fact that the media and the licence are distinct elements they've continued to create revenue streams where they are not justified to exist (by pretending that you bought a product not a licence) the lion share of the cost of a cd is the licence, if it's scratched or broken I should be able to exchange it for the cost of the plastic and shipping for a new one, I shouldn't have to buy another licence!

Twattery of the highest order.

Joe
18-08-2015, 17:42
Hi peps

Just a thought on this c op y legal side of things

If I buy a LP at a boot sale and pay cash I then become the owner of said recording and have also purchased some new blank tape ,

Is it l egal for me to c opy whatever tracks I want onto the new tape or is it a grey area

Notice the s pacing just in case someone is looking :D

A few spaces won't save you. The feds are tracking every word posted anywhere on the internet, and you're going' daaaahn you slag!

PaulStewart
18-08-2015, 18:03
Twattery of the highest order.

+1 to that

Audio Al
18-08-2015, 18:03
and you're going' daaaahn you slag! :eek::scratch::lol:

Macca
18-08-2015, 18:57
and you're going' daaaahn you slag! :eek::scratch::lol:

It's what the FBI would say when they nicked you if they had somehow been fused with the Sweeny in a weird, law-enforcement related genetic experiment. Cockney accent, perfect teeth and hair.

Audio Advent
18-08-2015, 18:59
Legally due to the dogs breakfast of legislation from this and the previous (Labour) government,

You surely mean the previous Lib Dem / Tory government? As well as the previous previous Labour one.

Why are all three unable to make a law based on common sense? I blame vested interests by lobbyists and their associated MPs, plus week puppet PMs.

Joe
18-08-2015, 19:01
It's what the FBI would say when they nicked you if they had somehow been fused with the Sweeny in a weird, law-enforcement related genetic experiment. Cockney accent, perfect teeth and hair.

With Dick van Dyke in the John Thaw role, and Brad Pitt in the Dennis Waterman role.
'Meeeeeerrrry Poppins, get yer knickers on and make us a cup of Rosie Lee!'

PaulStewart
18-08-2015, 19:01
It's what the FBI would say when they nicked you if they had somehow been fused with the Sweeny in a weird, law-enforcement related genetic experiment. Cockney accent, perfect teeth and hair.

Crazy, but oh so right. :clapclapclap: :clapclapclap: :clapclapclap: :clapclapclap: :laugh:

Macca
18-08-2015, 19:02
With Dick van Dyke in the John Thaw role, and Brad Pitt in the Dennis Waterman role.
'Meeeeeerrrry Poppins, get yer knickers on and make us a cup of Rosie Lee!'

It practically writes itself.

Lodgesound
18-08-2015, 20:25
Read between the lines People....

This is not aimed at the casual amateur recordist with their home machines.

The reason this has been made law is to try and get recompense for the artists concerned from the now MASSIVE problem created by folk uploading albums / musical works to sites such as Youtube.

Think about it....this operation is now completely illegal as by it's very nature it involves format shifting.

It means that Google can no longer legally justify having any of this material UPLOADED for general use by ANY of it's users (the common people) and must now BY LAW have the material SEPARATELY LICENSED and supplied thus in order for it to be used in this manner.

It basically means the end of the copyrite issues being "alleviated" by the payment of a blanket fee to the PRS.

What actually happens in practice due to this change remains to be seen.

I for one await with keen interest.

RichB
18-08-2015, 20:38
All a bit too little too late, the horse bolted years ago with napster and they've been trying to lasso it since. Music industry a dead duck, milking formats and revenues from past glories. New up and coming acts selling direct to fans. Would they really come after tapers? Like 30 years too late.

Rothchild
18-08-2015, 21:13
Read between the lines People....

This is not aimed at the casual amateur recordist with their home machines.

The reason this has been made law is to try and get recompense for the artists concerned from the now MASSIVE problem created by folk uploading albums / musical works to sites such as Youtube.

Think about it....this operation is now completely illegal as by it's very nature it involves format shifting.

It means that Google can no longer legally justify having any of this material UPLOADED for general use by ANY of it's users (the common people) and must now BY LAW have the material SEPARATELY LICENSED and supplied thus in order for it to be used in this manner.

It basically means the end of the copyrite issues being "alleviated" by the payment of a blanket fee to the PRS.

What actually happens in practice due to this change remains to be seen.

I for one await with keen interest.

It's illegal (uploading an album to youtube), and always has been, not because it involves format shifting but because it involves infringing the copyright agreement granted by the licence that came with the purchase of the work (basically by creating a public broadcast).

What's failed is any sort of sensible understanding of the difference between the portability of a granted licence for personal use and public distribution (against the rights granted by the licence - potentially using the same tools as for the legitimate shifting of the licensed content).

This is also is underpinned by a deficit of understanding about the methods for distributing digital media - the Youtube example is easy: youtube has one owner and is hosted on their servers, that's why we have takedown notices. What the powers that be can't see a way around (because there isn't one) is bittorrent, because there might not be a single whole file on a particular machine, the engine that holds the links to the files doesn't hold the files (so isn't infringing) and you can take out individual machines but not necessarily take out the whole file.

Another problem is that just because the law is not 'aimed' at home recordists it doesn't mean that it won't ever be used against them (or as a pretext to cause folk issues for other, non-illegal behaviours).

Does anyone have any idea where this leaves Amazon (or how they deal with it) with their (really rather wonderful) 'autorip' thing - when you buy a cd from amazon they give you access to the mp3 of it (not for all titles) it's even slick enough that you can then put the amazon app on your phone and it gives you access to the mp3s of the cds you bought, just like that! If I use it, should I report myself to the police?

Rothchild
18-08-2015, 21:14
All a bit too little too late, the horse bolted years ago with napster and they've been trying to lasso it since. Music industry a dead duck, milking formats and revenues from past glories. New up and coming acts selling direct to fans.

Bang on.


Would they really come after tapers? Like 30 years too late.

Desperate times call for desperate measures!

struth
18-08-2015, 21:20
I get them with Amazon but rarely listen these days. I imagine with their selling power, it will be in their agreement with the providers. The can of course remove it from use at any time without notice should they wish, as they can with their books( strip it from your amazon reader; as long as they have access via wifi of course). I disagree with this as s far as I'm concerned if I buy the e-book its mine ...... there are ways to prevent the loss(read legalised theft), but I of course would not condone such behaviour;)

mikmas
18-08-2015, 21:24
Another problem is that just because the law is not 'aimed' at home recordists it doesn't mean that it won't ever be used against them (or as a pretext to cause folk issues for other, non-illegal behaviours).


The RIAA tried that tactic some years ago in an attempt to crack down onP2P sharing and in the end pretty much gave up. As a means of setting an example, they pursued individual users (including the very young) and threatened with all kinds of retribution unless they paid quite extortionate amounts of money in 'out of court' settlements . So extortionate that at the time one US judge described their tactics as 'Mafia-esque' and the media outrage caused them to back off and concentrate on pirate distributers. I doubt whether the tactic will see the light of day again, either there or here.

Rothchild
18-08-2015, 21:33
I get them with Amazon but rarely listen these days. I imagine with their selling power, it will be in their agreement with the providers. The can of course remove it from use at any time without notice should they wish, as they can with their books( strip it from your amazon reader; as long as they have access via wifi of course). I disagree with this as s far as I'm concerned if I buy the e-book its mine ...... there are ways to prevent the loss(read legalised theft), but I of course would not condone such behaviour;)

I don't listen to them either, because the moment the cd is delivered I rip it to flac and put it on my pi! (which then plays it as a flac locally or transcodes it on the fly to an mp3 if I want to listen to it remotely)

I've not seen them suggest any limit to what I can do with the mp3 (in that it seems to come with the same personal consumption licence as the cd), and I'm not limited to playing it via their app (so the deleted ebook example doesn't apply), it's just a file and I can move it around devices as I see fit (well I've not been told otherwise) yet apparently what I do with my cds (detailed above without any funny spacing, shit I'm in trouble!) is apparently illegal.

struth
18-08-2015, 21:38
I don't listen to them either, because the moment the cd is delivered I rip it to flac and put it on my pi! (which then plays it as a flac locally or transcodes it on the fly to an mp3 if I want to listen to it remotely)

I've not seen them suggest any limit to what I can do with the mp3 (in that it seems to come with the same personal consumption licence as the cd), and I'm not limited to playing it via their app (so the deleted ebook example doesn't apply), it's just a file and I can move it around devices as I see fit (well I've not been told otherwise) yet apparently what I do with my cds (detailed above without any funny spacing, shit I'm in trouble!) is apparently illegal.

Yes at moment but it may change. The books have adrm which ties you to amazon's readers.....sort of :) Nook and kobo I think do the same,.. some are epub but have drm