Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
I would simply say that "fair use" (ie personal use) of copyrighted music broadcast over tv, radio, internet needs to be balanced with fair compensation for the artists/musicians.
I would like to hear more from the RIAA on their suggestion that there are technologies that can provide fairness for consumers and musicians, while minimizing piracy for profit...before I condemn them as greedier than the Consumer Electronics Association, which represents the industry, not consumers.
|
I think you misunderstand what fair use is about if you think it has anything to do with not compensating artists. There is no balance to be found. Consumers are either able to use their purchases as they see fit (in ways that do not redistribute to others) or they do not. The RIAA/MPAA wants them to not be able to.
An example: part of fair use means that when I purchase a DVD, I have the right to watch that DVD on my DVD player - whether it's a Sony DVD player, Toshiba DVD player, or my PC. Yet, if I use the Linux operating system, it is actually
illegal for me to watch my legally purchased DVD on my computer! The reason is because it requires cracking the protections on the DVD. Yet,
fair use means I have the right to bypass those protections for my own needs. It does not give me the right to then redistribute the product without those protections, but it does give me the right to bypass the protections if I want to and make copies for myself.
This has nothing to do with making sure artists are compensated, and everything to do with the RIAA/MPAA making sure they can get money out of every possible scenario in which you'd use their product.