Compact Discs

Redeemed Fool wrote:

Why do you think it's illegal to rip a cd to mp3? I'm just wondering not fighting. If they own the original format they can put it on their devices.

it's not the ripping that is illegal (and unethical and immoral), but the giving away.  When you rip a CD and give it away without deleting the ripped files the person receiving the CD is actually stealing it because they are receiving goods intended for purchase without paying for them. If you sell the CD without deleting the files then you are stealing because your right of ownership of the media contained on the CD transfers to the new owner.

This is the morality lesson I feel is getting lost with kids these days. They, and adults like them, do not see this as stealing, but it is. When we duplicate something we bought and keep the duplication while giving away the original we are denying the people that created the original their right to continue making a profit for their work. This is stealing and just as much a sin as telling "white lies" and "water cooler gossip".

Since the thread has taken a detour thru Ethics Avenue, I'd like to hear some opinions on the following. 

Someone buys a record/vinyl/LP album, and owns the album legally. Then a friend offers to rip them an exact copy of that album from their CD so that person can listen to the music (off of the LP they own) on their phone or on a CD-R in their car (places a record isn't compatible). How dogmatic do we get in this case ?

I realize some may answer with "well why didn't he just buy a CD in the first place instead of a record ?"

That's beside the point I want to bring up. Lemme put it another way: Someone spends thousands on their record collection during the 70s and early 80s. They OWN the albums legally but technology moves on, the person has a friend who owns the same albums, but he owns them on CDs. He rips them all for his record-owning friend to listen to anywhere and on anything.
Ethically wrong ? Why ?

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

Since the thread has taken a detour thru Ethics Avenue, I'd like to hear some opinions on the following. 

Someone buys a record/vinyl/LP album, and owns the album legally. Then a friend offers to rip them an exact copy of that album from their CD so that person can listen to the music (off of the LP they own) on their phone or on a CD-R in their car (places a record isn't compatible). How dogmatic do we get in this case ?

I would not have a problem with that as it would be a duplication of media I own.

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

I realize some may answer with "well why didn't he just buy a CD in the first place instead of a record ?"

That's beside the point I want to bring up. Lemme put it another way: Someone spends thousands on their record collection during the 70s and early 80s. They OWN the albums legally but technology moves on, the person has a friend who owns the same albums, but he owns them on CDs. He rips them all for his record-owning friend to listen to anywhere and on anything.
Ethically wrong ? Why ?

Again, I don't think so.

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

Since the thread has taken a detour thru Ethics Avenue, I'd like to hear some opinions on the following. 

Someone buys a record/vinyl/LP album, and owns the album legally. Then a friend offers to rip them an exact copy of that album from their CD so that person can listen to the music (off of the LP they own) on their phone or on a CD-R in their car (places a record isn't compatible). How dogmatic do we get in this case ?

Not that big of a deal to me. I rip my own LP's anyway but an example might be a remaster from Cliffy. I USED to have Messiah Prophet "Master Of The Metal" on vinyl. Don't know what happened to it, was lost in one of my many moves. He remastered it and offered it to anyone who had owned or previously owned it. But, as far as I know most of the stuff he remasters is usually out of print anyway. Since you already own it in one medium you've already paid for the product so someone ripping you the same thing isn't much different, other than if you bought it on vinyl AND cd (and I used to do this, I used to own every Styx album on vinyl, CD and cassette - wish I still had those vinyl albums especially since Edge Of The Century is so hard to find on vinyl, I got it the day it was released but no longer have it).

Here's another thing I do -- People at work give me their vinyl (we have over 500 employees and many have albums but no player). I make a deal with them. Instead of BUYING their records I tell them if they give them to me for FREE I will make them CD copies. A win/win for us both. I get the albums free and they trade me the record for a CD-R copy and they get to hear the albums they haven't been able to play.

MikeInFla wrote:

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

Since the thread has taken a detour thru Ethics Avenue, I'd like to hear some opinions on the following. 

Someone buys a record/vinyl/LP album, and owns the album legally. Then a friend offers to rip them an exact copy of that album from their CD so that person can listen to the music (off of the LP they own) on their phone or on a CD-R in their car (places a record isn't compatible). How dogmatic do we get in this case ?

Not that big of a deal to me. I rip my own LP's anyway but an example might be a remaster from Cliffy. I USED to have Messiah Prophet "Master Of The Metal" on vinyl. Don't know what happened to it, was lost in one of my many moves. He remastered it and offered it to anyone who had owned or previously owned it. But, as far as I know most of the stuff he remasters is usually out of print anyway. Since you already own it in one medium you've already paid for the product so someone ripping you the same thing isn't much different, other than if you bought it on vinyl AND cd (and I used to do this, I used to own every Styx album on vinyl, CD and cassette - wish I still had those vinyl albums especially since Edge Of The Century is so hard to find on vinyl, I got it the day it was released but no longer have it).

Just because something is no longer being made ("out of print") doesn't mean someone, somewhere doesn't own the rights to continue making it. "Out of print" does not mean "public domain." 

As for "previously owned", I'm not sure about the ethics of that, but I would be uncomfortable accepting it. If I lose something then I lose my rights to own it; acquiring a new copy without paying for it would feel wrong to me.


And concerning Cliffy, I don't believe what he is doing is ethical, even if the music is out of print. To remaster music is to change how it sounds, thereby creating different songs (version 1 and version 2). Only those that own the rights to the music, and anyone they give the proper authority to, can legally and ethically alter it. JMO. Of course,, this brings the question of covering songs live into play, so maybe I'm off base. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Same would go for someone who bought a cassette of an album, the tape is eaten by their player, so their friend rips them a CD-R of the album ? 
(I know I'm splitting hairs here, but I've been in chat rooms where people have had some very interesting responses to these scenarios)

What about buying used ? The person selling or trading the album (9 times out of 10) doesn't erase the files from their PC after they sell the album. The seller is in the wrong, but what about the buyer ? A person purchasing a used album isn't supporting the artist and is in reality buying an album that was intended for one owner. If you think about it, an album is sold one time from its original source and they earn their money. It's technically not intended for resale as the owner paid the artist/label for the entertainment on it, then someone else comes along and pays THAT person for the entertainment on the album that is rightly the artists and labels.  Again, splitting hairs, but what to do when black and white becomes a bit gray ?

MikeInFla wrote:

Here's another thing I do -- People at work give me their vinyl (we have over 500 employees and many have albums but no player). I make a deal with them. Instead of BUYING their records I tell them if they give them to me for FREE I will make them CD copies. A win/win for us both. I get the albums free and they trade me the record for a CD-R copy and they get to hear the albums they haven't been able to play.

When they give you the LPs they transfer the rights of ownership to you; it is no longer theirs. When you rip the songs to digital you are making a backup, something you can only do for your own use (or your family's). When you create the CD-R you are still within your rights as you are just copying the music to a format needed to play an another device you own. If you give the CD-R back to the original owner that person is then stealing the product because they are obtaining the rights of ownership with paying for it. Did you steal? No, but by your actions you allowed someone else to, and even supported their doing so because of the intent to give the CD-R away when you accepted the LP.

JMO.

(FWIW, I'm not just trying to be a "good two shoes" ... a lot of this is the product of the ethics courses I took as a CJ major and the countless plagiarism seminars and courses I've had to endure as an adjunct instructor for an online university.)

From what I've heard, if someone gives or sells you a vinyl album, they no longer have the right to the music on that album. So if someone gives u albums in exchange for a cd copy to listen to (since they don't have a record player) it's  unethical according to many. 

Now if you guys know me, you'll know I'm playing devils advocate with all this. I have my own opinions that would greatly upset most music moral majorities. I just like to hear people's thoughts on the subject. 

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

Same would go for someone who bought a cassette of an album, the tape is eaten by their player, so their friend rips them a CD-R of the album ? 
(I know I'm splitting hairs here, but I've been in chat rooms where people have had some very interesting responses to these scenarios)

What about buying used ? The person selling or trading the album (9 times out of 10) doesn't erase the files from their PC after they sell the album. The seller is in the wrong, but what about the buyer ? A person purchasing a used album isn't supporting the artist and is in reality buying an album that was intended for one owner. If you think about it, an album is sold one time from its original source and they earn their money. It's technically not intended for resale as the owner paid the artist/label for the entertainment on it, then someone else comes along and pays THAT person for the entertainment on the album that is rightly the artists and labels.  Again, splitting hairs, but what to do when black and white becomes a bit gray ?

I'm not really certain how I feel about accepting a replacement for something I lost or was stolen or destroyed.  As I indicated in a post above, I prefer to not do it. I don't think there is anything wrong with doing this, but while the person giving away the copy may have the best of intentions, and may be ethically "in line," his actions may not be 100% legal. Copyright is a sticky beast! I myself would never give someone a copy of my music under any circumstance.

As for the buying used, I have seen where some folks have indicated they sold a CD but kept a digital copy, and I never buy used from anyone that I think might be doing that. Of course I'm not naive, I know that the folks I have bought used CDs from here might still have copies on the hard drives. But I don't ask and they don't tell; it might still be illegal, but I don't believe it is unethical because I did not knowingly do anything wrong. Even if I find out it was so later it wouldn't bother me because at the time I didn't know it; I just won't buy anything from that person again.

As for the proper selling of used goods, wherein the original owner no longer gets profit so what's it matter ... what is being sold is the right of ownership.  When you buy an original CD (or DL these days) you own the rights to the media on that particular CD. You may part with those rights by any means you choose ... discard them, give hem away, or sell them ... just so long as the media container (CD, LP, files) go with the rights.

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

I have my own opinions that would greatly upset most music moral majorities. I just like to hear people's thoughts on the subject. 

And I am very much a goody two shoes when it comes to possession of books, CDs, movies, etc. My wife used to bring library copies of VHS tapes home and copy them to CD until I told her to knock it off (that's blatant stealing as far as I'm concerned).  I even struggle with still having my 19yo daughter's music backed up on my SS drive. She's an adult now and capable of keeping her own backups, but as shes' still technically under my roof (when not in school or Uganda, where she is right now), I keep them.  The day she gets her own place and officially "leaves the nest" those files will no longer rightfully belong on my hard drive IMO.

Concerning your earlier stats, I am the 1 in 10 that will delete my MP3s before parting with a CD. Of course, I never part with my music so it'll never happen, but ...

From the POV of the artist/label, the music that was created was meant to be purchased by a fan and listened to by only that person.
1. If they sell or trade or give that album away after enjoying it for themselves, the person receiving the album is obtaining something they should be purchasing from the artist/label. 

2. I know this scenario is only in a perfect world, but what makes it ok for the proper owner of 1 album to loan it or copy it for their child or spouse ? Ethically if a family member wants to listen to an album, they're suppose to buy their own. 

Again I don't adhere to all this, I just enjoy learning of others opinions on the subject.

MikeInFla wrote:

Here's another thing I do -- People at work give me their vinyl (we have over 500 employees and many have albums but no player). I make a deal with them. Instead of BUYING their records I tell them if they give them to me for FREE I will make them CD copies. A win/win for us both. I get the albums free and they trade me the record for a CD-R copy and they get to hear the albums they haven't been able to play.

Agree with BearDad that this isn't kosher. They no longer own it if they give it to you.

I am one of those that keeps a digital copy of things I sell on the off chance God calls me back to radio. I don't sell things I think I may want to listen to personally (which is why I've changed my mind a few times LOL) and have been working to buy copies of stuff I had digitally from my radio days that I actually would listen to on my own.

Maybe this has already come up (and I recall we had a similar ethics debate not that long ago it seems), but here's another question. I let my sons (who live at home) listen to what I own (and vice-versa). Is that legal? If so, what about when the son moves away?

ETA: I see Jim just asked essentially the same thing and BearDad had just answered it in the post above it (from his POV at least). Anyone else wish to weigh in?

I found that when my son moved away, he left his CDs behind. When I asked him, he said he has them on his laptop and phone and doesn't want the CDs anymore. So guess who has them now ? 

Ethically speaking, we're both in the wrong 

Here's another one, but probably a long-gone art form (so to speak)... Taping off the radio. I used to tape songs off the radio. Most of the time I was taping the radio station, not so much the music, but the station itself. I still have cassettes from when I would do an unscoped (no edits) taping of a station for an hour or 90 minutes at a time. Since I didn't buy that music was I allowed to tape it off the radio? What about the commercials from the radio broadcasts? I don't own the rights to those either but I even have the old commercials!

Guilty/Forgiven wrote:

From the POV of the artist/label, the music that was created was meant to be purchased by a fan and listened to by only that person.
1. If they sell or trade or give that album away after enjoying it for themselves, the person receiving the album is obtaining something they should be purchasing from the artist/label. 

Perhaps taking this the wrong way but sounds like you can never legally sell an album the way you worded that.

Quote :

2. I know this scenario is only in a perfect world, but what makes it ok for the proper owner of 1 album to loan it or copy it for their child or spouse ? Ethically if a family member wants to listen to an album, they're suppose to buy their own. 

It would be interesting to see some kind of official RIAA document that spells out just what is and isn't kosher.

Does the industry seriously think ANYBODY would buy 4 copies of a movie so all 4 members of your household could watch it together? But I bet they do expect as those members leave, they would need to buy their own copy to watch it outside the home. Now if it was no longer available, I wouldn't have a problem providing a copy. I'm even of the mind that if they re-release after that, too bad, they should have kept it in the distribution chain to start.

MikeInFla wrote:

Here's another one, but probably a long-gone art form (so to speak)... Taping off the radio. I used to tape songs off the radio. Most of the time I was taping the radio station, not so much the music, but the station itself. I still have cassettes from when I would do an unscoped (no edits) taping of a station for an hour or 90 minutes at a time. Since I didn't buy that music was I allowed to tape it off the radio? What about the commercials from the radio broadcasts? I don't own the rights to those either but I even have the old commercials!

Perhaps urban legend but I've always thought that was a no no as well. I assumed (other than being money making on ads) that was why most stations had so many breaks and talked over the leads and exits so much so you couldn't record very much. Also the large number of radio edits so they could squeeze in more stuff.

Xid wrote:

Playing another artist's songs live is covered by the venue.

Really? I have NEVER heard that. Always thought it was on the artist (or their label) unless they were given express permission from the original artist to perform it without paying royalties.

topshot rhit wrote:

Does the industry seriously think ANYBODY would buy 4 copies of a movie so all 4 members of your household could watch it together?

On a similar note, it wasn't until recently that software companies, particularly virus scanners (McAfee, etc.) would allow the installation of their software on more than one computer. Yet how many families do you know with only one computer? Do they really expect me to pay $40+ each year for multiple computers?

Xid wrote:

BearDad wrote:

Of course,, this brings the question of covering songs live into play, so maybe I'm off base. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Playing another artist's songs live is covered by the venue.

Legally, but ethically?  j/k

And speaking of legally

http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php?content_selector=piracy_online_the_law

Now let me stop this thread for a moment and point out that these are all well articulated arguments and moral leanings that sound great but inevitably never find a black and white conclusion. 
I've been apart of many threads with this topic and I always take the discussion to its inevitable end... we only go so far with our own ethical understandings of this subject. If we are to stand for an ethical understanding of music licensing and transfers, then we have to go all the way. Just like observing the Law, if we fail in one area, we're not holding to ALL of the Law.  I have seen many different interpretations of what is or isn't ethical when it comes to music copying, owning, transferring, etc. 
Perhaps at the end of the day, it's a matter of our own conscience ? Obviously within reason though...

K, so I read that riaa link Beardad and all I have to say is: everyone here would still be in jail and poor, based on the punishments and legal actions they could take on the activities we've all been involved in throughout our lives. 

Kind of scary