Current copyright law

[imamartian]

can anyone answer this succinctly?

It's been discussed before probably, but hopefully someone will be able to answer in a one-liner, to save me trawling threads.

I want to get some stiff little fingers tracks... i had a album when i was a kid, and now want to listen to them on my ipod. I don't want to get my vinyl out, as i no longer have a turntable - don't want to buy one either. Also, don't really want to pay for the tracks on i-tunes (or whatever), but downloading the tracks from torrent sites (although i don't know any that are active anymore!!) feels wrong, yet right.

Don't i own my share of that music from when i bought the vinyl album 30 years ago?

 

[Sam Gangee]

It's down to your own conscience. Nobody is going to check your iPod and arrest you. But do you really want to deprive the guys of their royalties?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff_Little_Fingers

 

[imamartian]

It's down to your own conscience. Nobody is going to check your iPod and arrest you. But do you really want to deprive the guys of their royalties?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff_Little_Fingers[/QUOTE]

Really? can i download it without legal consequences? after all i have the album in my loft....and it's not like it's new stuff i want.

If so, what torrent sites can i use?

They're actually playing quite close by tonight (in Sheffield) didn't realise until it was too late, might have gone along..

 

[^woody^]

Under current law, it is illegal to copy music even if you have bought the original. However, it is unlikely that any legal action will be taken against those that do for personal use

Next year, the law is due to change to allow limited copying across formats, for personal use.

But either way, downloading a copy of music you own from others, is not the same as copying the music yourself from your own collection.

Whether you bought the album 30 years ago or last week, it's all the same in terms of your rights/restrictions

 

[BigRobCanUFixIt]

I sold all my CDs on ebay years ago.

My MP3 collection is pretty healthy now but I dont listen to some of the tracks now. Could I sell back the tracks I bought on the internet for less than I paid for them?

Not sure if that would be classed as dodgey now.... (knock of nigel)

 

[imamartian]

for me this whole concept is wrong.... you write a song you sell it... a bit like you make a cheese cob you sell it.... you paint the Mona lisa, you sell it.... you make a chair you sell it.. you don't pay every time you sit in the chair ffs !!!! that's why pop stars are better off than chair makers !!!

 

[BigRobCanUFixIt]

thats right I wonder if chair makers get royaltys for people sitting in the football stadiums watching the gigs too....

 

[timtheenchanter]

for me this whole concept is wrong.... you write a song you sell it... a bit like you make a cheese cob you sell it.... you paint the Mona lisa, you sell it.... you make a chair you sell it.. you don't pay every time you sit in the chair ffs !!!! that's why pop stars are better off than chair makers !!!

not really.
You buy a chair, use it as many times as you like, you want the newer style, you cant just have one because you bought the old one.
music artist is more like the chair designer, designs one chair, hundreds are sold.
I do think the american copyright is a better deal though, you have been able to copy music/media for your own use for years, so buy the CD for home, copy it for the car etc has been perfectly legal.
IIRC the major record companies have put this stipulation into the disclaimers on new media, though technically still illegal atm, they waive their rights for personal use.

 

[Sam Gangee]

for me this whole concept is wrong.... you write a song you sell it... a bit like you make a cheese cob you sell it.... you paint the Mona lisa, you sell it.... you make a chair you sell it.. you don't pay every time you sit in the chair ffs !!!! that's why pop stars are better off than chair makers !!!

Think of it in terms of books. A much better analogy. Every book copy is sold separately and brings in a (usually tiny) profit.

It's really not feasible to write a book (or a song) and sell it to one individual for a million pounds. It doesn't work the same as oil paintings.

It's like a plastic duck for the bath. It costs around £20,000 to design and create the steel mould tool. But you don't make one duck and sell it for £20,000.99 to one person. You make 30,000 ducks and sell each one for 99p.

Recording music isn't cheap. It costs thousands of pounds for a recording session to produce a song and much more for an album. The musician's incentive is that he'll earn a living. Deprive him of the profit and he won't produce music.

 

[imamartian]

for me this whole concept is wrong.... you write a song you sell it... a bit like you make a cheese cob you sell it.... you paint the Mona lisa, you sell it.... you make a chair you sell it.. you don't pay every time you sit in the chair ffs !!!! that's why pop stars are better off than chair makers !!!

Think of it in terms of books. A much better analogy. Every book copy is sold separately and brings in a (usually tiny) profit.

It's really not feasible to write a book (or a song) and sell it to one individual for a million pounds. It doesn't work the same as oil paintings.

It's like a plastic duck for the bath. It costs around £20,000 to design and create the steel mould tool. But you don't make one duck and sell it for £20,000.99 to one person. You make 30,000 ducks and sell each one for 99p.

Recording music isn't cheap. It costs thousands of pounds for a recording session to produce a song and much more for an album. The musician's incentive is that he'll earn a living. Deprive him of the profit and he won't

produce music.

yes agreed... and with Tim's response too...

mine was a rather flippant, poorly thought out suggestion