2. digital
  3. 124972-539

Redbook Keeps Surprising

I was a Best Buy to get a memory card reader for my computer. Looked at the CDs and saw a few in the bargain bin that I would like to have, only a few dollars. Came home, ripped them with DB power amp, picked the best cover art. Transferred to my Aurender through the NAS and played away. WOW, impressive sound and I really enjoyed them both. I like the High Res downloads and my SACD collection but am often really impressed by good Redbook CD. It really is the music that counts. 
128x128davt
lp2cd
101 posts
 
*Sigh*

As I've already noted, copyright law gets weedy and complex, fast. I'm not a lawyer and others seem willing to wade into it deeper. More power to them. In short, if one disposes of a commercial CD in such a manner that some else can own it and copy it, then one should also delete any copies of that CD one has made for themselves, IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN IT IS FAIR TO THE MUSICIANS et al. The musicians deserve to be paid and make a living rather than being ripped, ahem, off. Likewise, don't be giving away (or selling!) copies. Simple. And if I've managed to guilt-trip someone, good.

Someone suggested giving the original CDs to the library. Fine, do so, but you still have to delete your rips. And it's a good bet that the library will not circulate the donated CDs. If they accept them at all, they'll sell them. Libraries are a whole different world of copyright. E. g. much of the time, libraries have to pay *substantially more* than the retail price of a book for circulation to make up in part the potential loss of sales of that book. Think about it a bit and it makes sense. One of the unfortunate consequences of the internet, and digital technology, is people these days seem to think everything ought to be free. Didn't work that way so much with LPs.
jafreeman's avatar
jafreeman
689 posts
 
So how is a large retailer of used CDs, LPs and DVDs able to buy from me the originals I have purchased new and then stock them for direct resale to someone else?  I don't see them contacting labels and artists to provide them royalties.  In this way, many people are entertained by only one original purchase. This must be unethical, if not a violation of royalty rights.  I have purchased a lot of used CDs and movies, too.   Are these retailers paying into some large royalty pool that is paid out to artists or studios?  

dgarretson
2,599 posts
 

This clarifies the distinction between copyright and ownership of the material object in which it is embodied:

"Copyright Law of the United States of Americaand Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

Circular 92

§ 202 . Ownership of copyright as distinct from ownership of material object

Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object."

And the US Supreme Court's 2013 decision on "first sale doctrine":

http://smallbiztrends.com/2013/03/resale-rights-you-bought-own.html

Particularly:

"Here in the States we have something called the “first sale doctrine.” It simply means that once a tangible copyrighted work (or something with copyright in it) is sold lawfully the first time, the original copyright owner no longer has rights over the physical item. After that, the buyer can do whatever he or she wants with it — sell it again, donate it, whatever.  That’s why you can legally hold a yard sale or sell computers on eBay. The resale right applies only to the physical item sold, not copies."

That protects the reseller of the original CD and subsequent resale of the material item through commerce.

lp2cd
101 posts
 
Thank you dgarretson, and exactly.  As I have said repeatedly, one can dispose of the original recording however one sees fit. One mustn't, however, retain, or worse sell or give away, *copies* of copyrighted recordings. Retailers, or libraries, or others selling "preowned" CDs operate under the assumption that copyright restrictions on copying have been observed. The reality, of course, may be less than perfectly compliant, but that doesn't mean that one shouldn't try. And certainly one shouldn't congratulate one's self for shorting the composer/performer/musician/et al.

BTW, if anyone is interested in how to effectively and cost-efficiently shelve 1000's of Redbook or otherwise CDs, I have some good suggestions (I think...) based on my own experience.
dgarretson
2,599 posts
 

lp2cd,

"One mustn’t...retain...*copies* of copyrighted recordings."

That is precisely where we differ. I see nothing in the law that restricts retaining a fair-use copy for personal use and then disposing of or reselling the original material object. The copyrighted interest in the original material object legally ceases at initial purchase. Fair use allows for a copy or copies for personal use. Subsequent resale of the material object does not retroactively cancel what was formally protected as fair use. However, the sale of the fair use copy or copies of that copy is illegal.

What "one mustn’t do" may be a moral decision, but is not in law as far as I can see. Even in a moral sense, I can’t see how it hurts the artist. In college campus parlance, it is at most a "micro-injury." The real damage is done through file sharing and resale of copies, whether in a commercial interest or not. And this is why the RIAA focuses its discussion on duplicates and not on originals.

I do agree that you raised an interesting discussion.

More to discover