"If you didn't pay for it, you've stolen it!"
Tim May
timcmay at got.net
Sun Oct 26 11:12:57 PST 2003
On Friday, October 24, 2003, at 09:00 AM, Steve Wollkind (by way of
Steve Wollkind <steve at njord.org>) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Friday 24 October 2003 10:14, Harmon Seaver wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 10:43:22PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
>>> TM: the last two paragraphs were of course added by me. But the point
>>> is still valid, that much of Hollywood's claims about "illegal
>>> listening" are not really any different from "reading without buying"
>>> books and magazines in libraries. The more urgent issue is this crap
>>
>> Not to mention all the CDs and movies available in libraries.
>> What's the
>> difference in borrowing CDs from a library and taking them home and
>> taping
>> or mp3ing them and getting them from the net?
>
> There's no difference....both are illegal. It's just much easier to
> catch
> people who leave a trail by downloading files than people who legally
> check a
> disc out of a library and then illegally copy it in the privacy of
> their own
> home.
>
You are incorrect. "Both are illegal" is not correct. The Home
Recording Act of 1992 explicitly made home use for noncommercial (no
renting, no selling, no commercial use in bars or radio stations) fully
legal. The text can be Googled and the topic has been covered here many
times.
In shyster terms, it created a "safe harbor" for home taping.
The HRA even established a "blank tape and media tax," which is why
many CD-Rs sold say "Music" on them (ostensibly these are the media for
which the blank media tax was paid by someone, with revenues ostensibly
given to Hollywood).
The DMCA threw a spanner in the works in various ways, partly rewriting
the HRA, partly adding new stuff.
But the existence of the HRA and the money sent to Hollywood and
Nashville through the HRA music taxes make successful prosecution of
any home taper nearly impossible.
--Tim May
More information about the Testlist
mailing list