IRMA & Ipods

godtabh

I was listening to Matt Cooper on the Last Word last night.

The spokesperson for IRMA said that it was illegal to copy your own cd's to your ipod/mp3 player.

Did any one else here this? Is this true?

If it is, is it not a double standard of IRMA then? I know it would be impossible to try and enforce but if they are so keen on defending their member’s copywrited material why not?

tba

I heard about this alright, I believe that its new legislation that prevents consumers making back ups of their copyrighted material or something, maybe it happened or maybe it was that dream I have where in the end I kill Jack Thompson :v:

Sully

kearnsr wrote:

I was listening to Matt Cooper on the Last Word last night.

The spokesperson for IRMA said that it was illegal to copy your own cd's to your ipod/mp3 player.

Did any one else here this? Is this true?

If it is, is it not a double standard of IRMA then? I know it would be impossible to try and enforce but if they are so keen on defending their member’s copywrited material why not?

Stupid law.

I was listening to today FM this morning and the DJ was giving away an iPod which "you can use to download all your music to".

Wanted to text in and say: Beware of the IRMA!!!

Whats the point in the law? You own the CD. You should have the right to do what you want with it. I think tis about time the IRMA got a grip on themselves updating laws to MODERN society. Not the one they were born in. ><

godtabh

It is crazy.

Its like saying you buy a cd and can only use it on one cd player (as in DRM music!)

There should be some sort of compermise. You buy a cd so you should have to right to play it on any medium you want (which I thought I did) as long as you arent affecting copywrite laws (which I didnt think I was)

BigEejit

what the hell is this law and where did it come from ... and how do they think they can enforce this? ... muppetry, sheer stupidity of politicians groveling to the big company donation/backhander/brown envelope

whippet

BigEejit wrote:

what the hell is this law and where did it come from ... and how do they think they can enforce this? ... muppetry, sheer stupidity of politicians groveling to the big company donation/backhander/brown envelope

The law is there, but they have no interest in enforcing it. The only people IMRA are going after are the big file sharers, who are sharing tens of thousands of tracks.

BigEejit

Is it a europe wide law that all countries have to pass or is it something Ireland did off its own bat?

godtabh

whippet wrote:

The law is there, but they have no interest in enforcing it. The only people IMRA are going after are the big file sharers, who are sharing tens of thousands of tracks.

The man on the last word said the the 16 people and 1 company they sent letters to had 50,000 tracks. Thats not an awful lot. I've approx half of that on my computer. I'm sure there is others with a lot more that do share them. They as fair as I can see are just pushing their weight around scaring scaring teenagers and there is alot more bigger fish out there

tba

http://www.ifpi.org/site-content/press/20000711.html wrote:

The Irish Copyright and Related Rights Act (ICRRA), the first major update since 1963 of legislation protecting artists, authors, producers, performers and other creators, was signed into law yesterday (june 10th) by Irish president Mary McAleese.

The law simplifies legal procedure in copyright cases and makes bootlegging of live concerts an offence for the first time. It provides some of the stiffest penalties for copyright violation in Europe, allowing the courts to demand that music pirates or other infringers pay punitive damages as well as compensatory damages to rights owners.

It also confirms penalties of maximum five-year prison sentences and fines of up to IR£100,000 for copyright crime.

The bill will serve as useful guidance to the European Union, which is moving forward with its Green Paper on Counterfeiting and Piracy.

Importantly for the digital music marketplace, the law contains several provisions to protect copyright on the internet.

It makes clear, for example, that it is copyright owners who control the distribution of their work on the internet. Further, hacking devices designed to bypass encryption or other technical measures have been deemed illegal. This will help ensure the authorised distribution of music and other intellectual property over the internet.

Jay Berman, Chairman and CEO of the IFPI said, "The new Irish Copyright Act is a first, important step in promoting and protecting the dynamic creative culture of Ireland, particularly the domestic music industry. It also significantly bolsters the fight against piracy."

Dick Doyle, Director General of IRMA, the Irish recording industry association said, "We are pleased that the Irish government has led the way in strengthening the rights of copyright owners in music, software and databases. This innovative bill will, we believe, serve as a role model for other EU countries to follow."

All law is subject to interpretation

BigEejit

Ah ... so it was muppetry and sheer stupidity of politicians groveling to the big company donation/backhander/brown envelope ....

So we got our own version of the DMCA now people ... dont you feel loved :mad:

D

Yes technially speaking it is illeagal. Remember when you buy a cd, you aren't buying the cd or the music, you are buying a liscense to use the cd in a certain way. However, i doubt anyone will ever get arrested for it. It's the old tactic of making laws really strict so that later on you can use discretion.

seamus

Some choice quotes from the relevant act:

140.—(1) A person who, without the consent of the copyright Offences. owner—
(a) makes for sale, rental or loan,
........
a copy of a work which is, and which he or she knows or has reason to believe is, an infringing copy of the work, shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) In this section "loan" means a loan for reward and in particular does not include a loan to a family member or friend for private and domestic use, and "lends" shall be construed accordingly.

So it's not an offence to lend it to a friend. But we knew that.

(1) The copyright in a work is not infringed by the making of a transient and incidental copy of that work which is technically required for the viewing of or listening to the work by a member of the public to whom a copy of the work is lawfully made available.

That's an interesting one. I would interpret that to mean that you may make a copy for your own use, provided that it's "transient" and "incidental". Copying a file to an mp3 player, and then deleting it in a month's time would certainly fall into that.

The key bit that IRMA are talking about though:

37.—(1) Subject to the exceptions specified in Chapter 6 and to any provisions relating to licensing in this Part, the owner of the copyright in a work has the exclusive right to undertake or authorise others to undertake all or any of the following acts, namely:

(a) to copy the work;

(b) to make available to the public the work;

(c) to make an adaptation of the work or to undertake either of the acts referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) in relation to an adaptation,

and those acts shall be known and in this Act referred to as "acts restricted by copyright".

By sharing file via any p2p network, you are clearly violating point (b). But by copying the file onto your mp3 player, you're not necessarily violating point (a), as you could easily argue that the exceptions in Chapter 6 exist (including an interesting one about no infringment if the work is copied from a 2D format into a 3D one).

IRMA are full of **** and we know that. Ultimately, if you copy all your music to your mp3 player and destroy your CDs, you're no longer breaking copyright.

FYI - the relevant act was enacted in 2000, just before the mp3 player craze (but at the height of the Napster issue), so you can't really say the politicians were pandering to the industry.

smeggle

This is part of the 'You own an iPOD - you can only have tracks downloaded from Apple itunes' issue.

Most of this is coming from the very companies who are providing the means for copying in the first place. Bit of a double standard imo.

Still I use Grouper which is 'Legal' IRMA can go play with there marbles far as I'm concerned.

Mutant_Fruit

smeggle wrote:

Still I use Grouper which is 'Legal' IRMA can go play with there marbles far as I'm concerned.

Aye, Grouper is legal, but downloading copyrighted tracks through it is still copyright infringement (not theft or 'piracy'). That ain't legal.

jaqian

All this bullying will do is push sharing music underground. Insteadof peer-2-peer it'll be person-2-person, what they use to call the "sneaker net" (take your files walk in your "sneakers" to another pc & upload files). It's the only save way to ensure you aren't screwed.

I want to buy legal music but Idon't want o be forced to buy an ipod or forced to use a subscription service where you risk losing ALL your music if you don't keep paying. I want o be able to walk into a music store, plug in my mp3 player and download the latest albums. And because there is no storage or packaging required the music should be much cheaper. Something like a music ATM would be cool choose your music, pay for it & download it straight away via usb/IR/Bluetooth.

Btw I use http://allofmp3.com which is legal in Russia best site for music IMO.