Thoughts on RIAA and CD Ripping
Fred von Lohmann has noted a governmental filing by the RIAA and others, which states the position that copying your CD onto your computer is an infringement, notwithstanding what they represented to the Supreme Court during the Grokster case, see prior post.
However as noted by Denise Howell and on Boing Boing, the RIAA web site contradicts this position, unless they are relying on subtle wording to preserve their position that they are granting permission.
"If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail." [emphasis added]
See RIAA link.
The RIAA's FAQ on Uploads and Downloads makes good use of modal auxiliary verbs in saying:
"Owning a CD means you own one copy of the music, and the U.S. record industry believes you should be able to make whatever personal use you choose. For example, you may make a compilation recording (on tape or on a CD) to use in the car or while exercising. But it’s a very different matter – and clearly neither legal nor fair – to make a copy of that CD or even one song available on the Internet for others to take." [emphasis added]
See also the Mitch Bainwol address at the 2005 NARM Convention, in which he says:
"Key Point: Burning and Ripping Are Becoming A Greater Threat than P2P"
but:
"We have no objection to personal use burning."
But to ripping by negative implication?
It's unclear where these statements are heading. In Bainwol's address, he lists under the topic:
"How Do We Build A Brighter Future""Pivot To New Products and Services"
-- DualDisc
-- Kiosks
-- Copy Protected CDs"Win the Messaging War"
It seems unlikely that suing consumers over ripping CDS to their iPODs will help win the messaging war, and it seems a court would quickly jump to pronounce this fair use as in the Rio space-shifting case and create some case law they don't want on the books.
So this may be more about the transition to copy protection and DMCA issues, which was the context of the filing that has raised this issue -- the Copyright Office's anticircumvention rulemaking proceedings.
Thanks to Phil Gomes.
