RIAA Opposes new fair use bill - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Xazy · 02-28-2007, 05:37 PM

Quote:

RIAA opposes new fair use bill
New bill would let customers make limited numbers of copies of copyrighted works

By Grant Gross, IDG News Service
February 28, 2007

A new bill in the U.S. Congress aimed at protecting the fair use rights for consumers of copyright material would "legalize hacking," the Recording Industry Association of America said.

The Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing U.S. Entrepreneurship (FAIR USE) Act, introduced Tuesday by U.S. Representatives Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, and John Doolittle, a California Republican, would allow customers to circumvent digital copy restrictions in six limited areas when copyright owners' business models are not threatened, Boucher said in a press release. So-called fair use doctrine allows customers of copyright works to make limited numbers of copies, particularly for reviews, news reporting, teaching and research.

The bill would allow exemptions to the anticircumvention restrictions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), passed by Congress in 1998. The bill is revamped from similar bills introduced in the last two sessions of Congress, Boucher said.

"The fair use doctrine is threatened today as never before," Boucher said in a statement. "Historically, the nation's copyright laws have reflected a carefully calibrated balanced between the rights of copyright owners and the rights of the users of copyrighted material. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act dramatically tilted the copyright balance toward complete copyright protection at the expense of the public's right to fair use."

But the RIAA said the bill would effectively repeal the DMCA. The bill would "allow electronics companies to induce others to break the law for their own profit," it said in a statement. Advances such digital music sales, online games, on-demand movies and e-books can be traced to DMCA protects, the RIAA said.

"The difference between hacking done for non-infringing purposes and hacking done to steal is impossible to determine and enforce," the RIAA said in its statement.

The Boucher bill would limit the availability of statutory damages against individuals and firms who may be found to have engaged in contributory infringement, inducement of infringement, or other indirect infringement. The bill would allow libraries to circumvent digital locks or secure copies of works that have been damaged, lost or stolen.

The Consumer Electronics Association applauded the bill, saying it would give protections to consumers, educators, and libraries. Without fair use protections, consumers couldn't use devices such as VCRs and digital TV recorders, the trade group said.

Of course the RIAA opposes this anything that limits them and their greed. To me it would seem that they do not want anything that will limit the use of music and to make people pay pay pay. I am glad to see that the legal system is finally working on making clearer laws about this.

dc_dux · 02-28-2007, 08:07 PM

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.

vox_rox · 02-28-2007, 09:43 PM

And so it continues. What it comes down to is the erosion of the public sphere. The RIAA and the MPAA, and their Canadian and International counterparts fail to understand that ALL of the art that is being "threatened" by piracy has been built on prior artists work and isspired by those works.

THAT is the foundation of culture, the continued existence the of the public sphere and the ability of anyone, artists or not, to participate in that sphere.

The RIAA/MPAA madness has to stop, and it is the responsibility of every one of us to enter the public debate and use it as it was meant to be used - to express opinions and to effect change.

Peace,

Pierre

Willravel · 02-28-2007, 10:01 PM

The second the RIAA tried to hack everyone's PC, they broke the law and should have been hit with 4700 suits.

Do not support RIAA artists. Fight them at every turn.

SecretMethod70 · 03-01-2007, 02:54 AM

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.

dc_dux · 03-01-2007, 04:43 AM

I understand the "fair use" of copyrighted material distributed over the airwaves or internet. (Is file sharing with strangers around the world "fair use"?) I also understand that piracy for profit has increased substantially with the advances of new technologies.

I dont support the RIAA tactics, but I do believe the issue needs to be addressed, with possible legislative solutions, to provide fairness to consumers and artists.

The Senate has a bi-partisan bil, the PERFORM Act, that approaches some of the overlapping issues in the FAIR USE act from a different perspective. The PERFORM Act has the support of the American Federation of Musicians, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, and the Recording Artists’ Coalition and is opposed by the cable tv/satellite radio industry, internet providers and the consumer electronics association.

I want to learn more about both bills before making sweeping conclusions or generalizations.

SecretMethod70 · 03-01-2007, 05:27 AM

There is an excellent article on the PERFORM Act over at Ars Technica (all emphasis mine):

Quote:

Senators introduce bill to restrict Internet, cable, and satellite radio recording click to show

Key excerpts:

Sen. Sununu said that "misguided requirements distort the marketplace by forcing industry to adopt agency-blessed solutions rather than allow innovative and competitive approaches to develop."

The Consumer Electronics Association was quick to voice opposition to the PERFORM Act. "We are disappointed that this legislation, which faced vocal bipartisan opposition last year, has been reintroduced. [This bill] would assault the freedom of consumers to use content they have lawfully acquired for private and noncommercial purposes in the privacy of their homes and vehicles.

Under the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, consumers have the right to make noncommercial analog and digital copies of broadcasts. That would change if the PERFORM Act passes this time around, as the ability to record music for one's own personal use would be restricted, marking another erosion of consumers' fair use rights.

dc_dux · 03-01-2007, 05:34 AM

Secret M...I think thats why further debate on both theh FAIR USE Act and the PERFORM Act is needed.

Articles in InfoWorld and ArsTechniqa present one perspective very well, but certainly not an objective analysis of both sides of the issue.

02-28-2007, 08:07 PM	#2 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	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. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 02-28-2007 at 08:18 PM..

02-28-2007, 09:43 PM	#3 (permalink)
vox_rox Psycho Location: Comfy Little Bungalow	And so it continues. What it comes down to is the erosion of the public sphere. The RIAA and the MPAA, and their Canadian and International counterparts fail to understand that ALL of the art that is being "threatened" by piracy has been built on prior artists work and isspired by those works. THAT is the foundation of culture, the continued existence the of the public sphere and the ability of anyone, artists or not, to participate in that sphere. The RIAA/MPAA madness has to stop, and it is the responsibility of every one of us to enter the public debate and use it as it was meant to be used - to express opinions and to effect change. Peace, Pierre __________________ --- There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people. ---

03-01-2007, 04:43 AM	#6 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	I understand the "fair use" of copyrighted material distributed over the airwaves or internet. (Is file sharing with strangers around the world "fair use"?) I also understand that piracy for profit has increased substantially with the advances of new technologies. I dont support the RIAA tactics, but I do believe the issue needs to be addressed, with possible legislative solutions, to provide fairness to consumers and artists. The Senate has a bi-partisan bil, the PERFORM Act, that approaches some of the overlapping issues in the FAIR USE act from a different perspective. The PERFORM Act has the support of the American Federation of Musicians, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, and the Recording Artists’ Coalition and is opposed by the cable tv/satellite radio industry, internet providers and the consumer electronics association. I want to learn more about both bills before making sweeping conclusions or generalizations. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 03-01-2007 at 05:21 AM..

03-01-2007, 05:34 AM	#8 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Secret M...I think thats why further debate on both theh FAIR USE Act and the PERFORM Act is needed. Articles in InfoWorld and ArsTechniqa present one perspective very well, but certainly not an objective analysis of both sides of the issue. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 03-01-2007 at 05:37 AM..

02-28-2007, 10:01 PM	#4 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	The second the RIAA tried to hack everyone's PC, they broke the law and should have been hit with 4700 suits. Do not support RIAA artists. Fight them at every turn.