Did you know copying your own CDs onto your own iPod is illegal?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Because it is, in Britain anyway, where there's no 'fair use' like there is in America.

Just confirmed to a work colleague by the BPI.

― mei (mei), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 15:10 (twenty-one years ago)

it's also illegal to tie your ocelot to a birch when there's an R in the month

― Sven Bastard (blueski), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 15:15 (twenty-one years ago)

How does one prosecute such a crime?

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:01 (twenty-one years ago)

they grease the ipod and insert it where the sun dont shine

― lukey (Lukey G), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:01 (twenty-one years ago)

ow! not my USB port!

― Sven Bastard (blueski), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:02 (twenty-one years ago)

do they stick your ipod up your ocelot?

― christo and jeanne-claude (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Of course it's illegal - just as it's always been illegal in this country to copy a record you own onto a cassette, even if it's solely for your own listening pleasure.

Did you really think the British legal system was going to ignore centuries of tradition and starting being reasonable or making any sort of sense, just because some egg-head boffins have invented some new-fangled technological jiggery-pokery?

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:35 (twenty-one years ago)

If you ask me all these problems began when some bunch of namby-pamby, airy-fairy, wishy-washy, bleeding-heart liberals made them get rid of the "rule of thumb" - a perfectly good law which, in the finest traditions of British justice, said that it was perfectly fine and dandy for a gentleman to beat his wife and children with a stick, provided that the stick was no wider than that gentleman's thumb.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:42 (twenty-one years ago)

I think it's allowed as long as one destroys the original CD after making the MP3. That's what I always do anyway, just to be safe.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:43 (twenty-one years ago)

xpost: is that the real orgin of the phrase "rule of thumb" ???

― The Argunaut (sexyDancer), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:45 (twenty-one years ago)

"Did you really think the British legal system was going to ignore centuries of tradition and starting being reasonable or making any sort of sense, just because some egg-head boffins have invented some new-fangled technological jiggery-pokery?"

I'm going to adopt "egg-head boffins" and "jiggery-pokery" as my new favorite British-isms.

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:47 (twenty-one years ago)

apparently not:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb

― The Argunaut (sexyDancer), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh. Well, in that case it bloody well should be.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:54 (twenty-one years ago)

After all, if beating your wife and kids doesn't consitute "fair use" then I'd like to know what bloomin' well does matey boy!

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 16:56 (twenty-one years ago)

So would it be illegal to copy by hand a book in your library, even if only for your own use?

― Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 17:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Surely not illegal if it's music written and performed by me, recorded to my own handmade CDs, and then copied with my own software to a hard disk player as designed and constructed by myself?

Thus, I remain at liberty, although as I cannot sing or play any musical instruments, and know nothing about computers, the results can be disappointing.

― Harthill Services (Neil Willett), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 19:02 (twenty-one years ago)

So would it be illegal to copy by hand a book in your library, even if only for your own use?

Renegade monks got burned for this sort if thing, in the Middle Ages.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 19:16 (twenty-one years ago)

So Alba, you're saying that people who copy their CDs onto their iPods are risking an ecclesiastic court and possible burning at the stake? How quaint!

― Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 19:39 (twenty-one years ago)

That's how they got Giordano Bruno. No doubt Franklin Bruno will go the same way.

― Ken L (Ken L), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 19:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Big Frank?

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 22 February 2005 19:47 (twenty-one years ago)

it's also illegal to tie your ocelot to a birch when there's an R in the month

Phew, that's good. I only do that between May 1 and August 31st.

― Ian Riese-Moraine (Eastern Mantra), Thursday, 24 February 2005 00:22 (twenty-one years ago)

LEGALIZE SKATEBOARDING

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 24 February 2005 00:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Big Frank?
Brown Francis. Or perhaps Dark Francis.

― Ken L (Ken L), Thursday, 24 February 2005 01:14 (twenty-one years ago)

two years pass...

Copying CDs could be made legal

"Owners would not be allowed to sell or give away their original discs once they had made a copy."

Yeah, that'll work...

― Ned Trifle II, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 12:18 (eighteen years ago)

How about this case:

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer. From a December 30, 2007 Marc Fisher Washington Post article "Download Uproar: Record Industry Goes After Personal Use"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html

― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:23 (eighteen years ago)

That article has already been pretty much debunked, but I don't have a handy link. The Washington Post took one line out of context and ran with it, from what I understand.

― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:39 (eighteen years ago)

yeah, apparently the story was he was being sued for the 2,000 songs he also happened to be sharing on kazaa

― tissp, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:52 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.