RIAA now says ripping is illegal
Reply #21 – 2006-02-19 13:26:00
What I don't understand is the concept that someone who does not own the CD can legally own a rip from that CD (whether it be a CD-R, an MP3, etc.). [a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=365504"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] In France citizens are allowed to get a copy of something they don't have (at least when the source is legal: from a library for example). But one important conditions must be respected: - the copy is for personal usage only (you can't lend it, sell it, distribute it...). Making a copy is not a right, but an exception of the right (i.e. copy is always prohibited, excepted for personal usage or few other cases like caricature). It may appear as strange that people can burn a CD or a DVD even when they didn't pay anything for it. But the reason is simple: the jurudic texts are old. When they were written, a personal copy meant: going into a library, opening a book, then opening a copybook, a pencil and spending three intensive days for copying what you want. It was very fastidious... and no one expected from this exception of the right to cause any harm to the industry. Then comes modern technique of reproduction, potentially more harmful but law didn't change. To compensate possible loss, several tax appeared: on cassette, VHS, photocopy... Copying was still legal for personal usage. Now with bit-to-bit reproduction techniques, the whole concept of copy have changed. Nowadays few things differenciate a copy from the original. Now that industry is selling files without support, nothing can differenciate a copy from the original. That's one reason explaining that french law is changing (another one is to respect a european obligation). But apparently, the [exception of the] right to copy will be maintained, even if you don't own or pay for the original. Will be forbidden: - breaking or circumventing DRM techniques (copying a RedBook CD won't therefore be illegal) - downloading from P2P (it's already considered as illegal in France but the current laws aren't precise and some people were already acquitted whereas other were condamn for the same reasons... well, it's called justice The future law is intended to be very clear on the P2P subject).