What's the difference between recording off the radio or the internet??? (1 Viewer)

Rachael B · Sep 13, 2003

The more I think about it, the more I think it's about the same thing. We all pay the R.I.A.A. a fee/levy/pseudo-tax for blank media, don't we. I know Canadians pay more than Americans. What we put on it and where we get it ought to be nobody else's business, up to an extent...

I really don't see much difference between recording radio and file-sharing. Either way you end up with RECORDED media.

Mike Broadman · Sep 13, 2003

I think the problem isn't with recording the stuff as much as it is distributing it.

I don't know- frankly, I've stopped caring.

John Watson · Sep 14, 2003

Look what they're doing to our songs, Ma!

Someday I'll be in trouble for humming outta tune

LewB · Sep 14, 2003

Don't the radio stations pay royalty fees to the RIAA ? They at least get paid for the song when the station airs it. I guess that they don't like the idea of the superior quality of digital media. You could pull a song off the web and start ripping CDs with decent quality that you could sell to someone else without paying RIAA their cut. Stuff off the air doesn't sound as good.
Having said that, I feel no pitty for the RIAA now that they are sueing teenagers. Hey RIAA, you have the money and the MBA degrees. Can't YOU figure out how to deal with the 21st century ?

Jeff Ulmer · Sep 14, 2003

Don't the radio stations pay royalty fees to the RIAA ?

No, they don't, they pay them to the performing rights societies who represent the songwriters and publishers responsible for creating and publishing the songs you want. Radio stations are licensed to broadcast, while internet distribution is not.

The RIAA is suing teenagers because they are breaking the law by infringing on the rights of those who did the work to create the music, and their ability to earn a living off their work. Should we let a 12 year old who rapes or murders someone off the hook because they are a teenager? I don't think so.

Ripping CDs and selling them is called piracy, and is also against the law and should be rightly punished.

Click to expand...

Rachael B · Sep 14, 2003

I could take the analog outputs of my satelite box and start recording the muzak channels...again, I get nearly free recordings. Shouldn't the R.I.A.A. do something about that?

Ultimately, will the Audio Gestapo go door to door confiscating all the audio recorders? How else could the R.I.A.A.'s desires be satisfied? Some of the members had a hand in selling us the recorders too! What'd they think we'd do with them(!)?:rolleyes

RobBenton · Sep 14, 2003

Sorry jeff but you must work for the RIAA with that kind of attitude.. I agree there is some wrong doing but they are not being "rightly" punished by being sued.

Richard Travale · Sep 14, 2003

I personally don't understand how anyone can get sued for this nowadays. Wouldn't the simple statement "other people have used my computer" make it impossible to prosecute?

Rachael B · Sep 14, 2003

Rob, Jeff is a musican and wants to earn royalty money. That fact tempers his responses and it's understandable.

Rachael B · Sep 14, 2003

Richard, I see little difference if you use a computer drive, CD, MD, cassette, DAT, or reel to reel recorder. It's all the same...recorded media.

...seems like I remember the R.I.A.A. making a fuss about college students and their cassette decks some years ago...?

Patrick Sun · Sep 14, 2003

Hey, record all you want, it's the distributing wherein lies the rub.

I'm closing this thread, please go to the RIAA Lawsuit thread to pick up any further discussion of this point.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=147666

Brian L · Sep 14, 2003

I could take the analog outputs of my satelite box and start recording the muzak channels...again, I get nearly free recordings. Shouldn't the R.I.A.A. do something about that?

They are not free, Rachel. You are paying a subscription fee, which some how gets back to the artist. Unless you have a pirated access card, and I am not going there!

And if you have a consumer CD-R recorder (Audio Only, I am not talking PCs here), you paid a fee when you bought it, and pay a fee when you buy blank media. Again, that in theory gets back to the artist, or at least the rights holders.

I think the crux of it is that what you do for your own use has a negligible impact on someones livelihood (unless you try to sell those recordings). Even if you gave a copy to me, its still negligible.

But with file sharing, you are talking lieterally millions of people exchaninging music that in many cases they never paid for.

I am of an age where I grew up making cassette copies of music I bought for use in my car. I might occasionally borrrow someone's LPs and tape them, or lend mine to others for the same purpose.

If we had the power of digital media and the internet back then, I don't know that I would not have taken advantage of it as many do today. But I grew up thinking even that was not quite kosher, and thus never jumped onto the MP3/file sharing band wagon (well, that and because the quality usually sucks).

But I have to agree with others. Its still stealing. I don't see how anyone can possibly put a positive spin on it.

And while I am violating my personal oath against taking part in discussions pertaining to file sharing, I wonder why no one has thought to sue Microsoft and Intel for making the tools required for someone to steal music?

After all, we have idiots out there suing gun makers when someone gets shot, as if the gun committed the crime. Others sue car makers because someone gets wasted, and drives into a bridge abutment.

Seems like it would have occurred to someone somewhere to sue the makers of the browser and hardware that enables so many to steal copyrighted materials.

Of course, I think any such suit would be just as stupid as the previous two examples, but I am still surprised that no one has gone after the big kahunas.

Side note to Jeff Ulmer: Any word on the album? I have it pre-ordered, and sure did like the sample tracks you had posted.

BGL

Click to expand...

John-Miles · Sep 15, 2003

You know Rachel you bring up a very good point, recording is ok froma radio, and presumably downloading and burning is really the same thing, but obviously the RIAA is upset that recording is now so much easier than it was over the radio.

and just to play devils advocate you arent distributing simply by connecting to a P-P network and having stuff on your computer, sure you are leaving your door wide open for anyone to come in and take what they want, but unless they ask you for it or you expressly offer it then how can you be distributing it?

if you walk into a store in the mall, the doors are wide open, there is plenty of merchandise there, if you just take it your stealing, the store isn't distributing. and it makes no difference if the store puts its racks or tables outside to attract more atention they still arent distributing till you buy it, until then your just stealing.

so i guess my point is no one is really distributing, and recording is legal, so whats the big issue?

maybe they need to make recording illegal

Justin Lane · Sep 15, 2003

Would someone get in trouble if they recorded a song from the radio to MP3 and then shared it on the MP3-ster of the week?

Sony cracks me up in this whole law suit business though. They pimp portable CD players which play MP3, DVD players that play MP3, boomboxes where they use CD-R playback as a selling point, and numerous CD-R drives, and then they decide to sue people as part of the RIAA. Kind of like the drug dealer who sells crack pipes to his clients then decides to turn them in right after he finds out they bought a little crack to use in the pipe elsewhere. Not good in the drug dealer business, and certainly not good in the music business.

J

Brian L · Sep 15, 2003

LOL, but in my morning paper, there are two editorials on the subject.

One, from everyone's favorite person, Jack Valente, crying that the sky is falling, and we better act now WRT pirating of movies. While I wish he would shut his pie hole with all this crying about closing the "analog hole" on my new HD TV and STB, he is obviously looking across the street at the record companies, and sees what may be signs of troubled waters ahead for the movie business.

The other, who's author escapes me, is from an Intellectual Property attorney from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (I may have gotten the name of the group slightly wrong). His point was that the recording industry needed to face reality, and adopt a new business model.

Humm. I guess we should all start stealing cars from dealerships. I think the price the charge is too high, and there are too many features on them that I do not want to have to pay for, so lets just take 'em. Then the dealerships will adopt a new business model that charges less for the cars.

While we are at it, I really would like a Denon 2900, but $1,000 is more than I want to spend. If we all steal one, then Denon will have to change business practices, and the rest of us can get one for a lower cost.

This all seems sensible to me.

I propose we start by targeting Porsches, since I want a new 911 Turbo, but think there are just too damn expensive

BGL

Lee Scoggins · Sep 15, 2003

Justin,

I am not sure you can be certain that Sony is fully supporting this. The RIAA involves many big and small record labels and Sony may not have a controlling equity share or have control over the RIAA legal actions.

After all the bad PR, I bet there are more than a few label execs wondering if hauling 12 year olds in front of cameras is the best course of action.

Justin Lane · Sep 15, 2003

After all the bad PR, I bet there are more than a few label execs wondering if hauling 12 year olds in front of cameras is the best course of action.

I agree, but there is also the possibility that in their twisted view of reality, pressing charges against a 12 year old is the ultimate scare tactic, setting both children and parents who formerly condoned MP3 downloading on the straight and narrow path of purchasing CDs at full MSRP.

Click to expand...

Justin Lane · Sep 15, 2003

I propose we start by targeting Porsches, since I want a new 911 Turbo, but think there are just too damn expensive

Are the Porsche dealers also selling kits to break into their own cars and make them easier to steal and distribute? This is essentially what Sony is doing, selling the MP3 and CD-R formats to the high heavens in one breath, then as a member of the RIAA pronouncing both formats the spawn of the devil in the next breath. I am not saying it is alright to steal, but something has to give here.

J

Click to expand...

Brian L · Sep 15, 2003

Are the Porsche dealers also selling kits to break into their own cars and make them easier to steal and distribute? This is essentially what Sony is doing, selling the MP3 and CD-R formats to the high heavens in one breath, then as a member of the RIAA pronouncing both formats the spawn of the devil in the next breath. I am not saying it is alright to steal, but something has to give here.

No argument with your views of Sony. They are definitely treading a fine line, and are trying to keep two sides of their house from trying to kill each other.

I had not read your post before I entered mine...I think we were teeing them up at the same time.

I really don't know what the answer is, but I do consider file sharing stealing, and have yet to read a single post from anyone that offered a valid rationalization for it. All I read are posts saying that this is the new reality, deal with it. Bull Sh*t, IMHO.

BGL

Click to expand...

Chet_F · Sep 15, 2003

I think the big difference with the Radio VS. the Internet is one simple thing:

CONTROL

The RIAA already has control of what you hear and how you hear it via radio......Clear Channel.

Unfortunately they do not have the control of the internet(nor anyone else for that matter.) They can't control what you listen too but more importantly they can't control the distribution. Today the internet is running a special: 8 billion downloads for the price of nothing.

Why anyone would want MP3s is news to me. They sound like SHIT! 25% of the time they don't play. They take forever to download...assuming your using a dial-up connection like the rest of the world. Sure they're cheap but so is White Castle and you don't see me with any sliders.

I'll take good quality CDs anyday. But the RIAA is not getting much $$ from my pocket as I buy used 95% of the time. I buy new once wvery 6 months if that. In fact before buying my last new cd I hadn't bought anything new for almost a year.

Why buy new when slightly used will do?

CF

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

What's the difference between recording off the radio or the internet??? (1 Viewer)

Screenwriter

Screenwriter

Stunt Coordinator

Screenwriter

Supporting Actor

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Similar Threads

Forum statistics