Gateway Supports Consumers' Digital Audio Rights

[Jerry Jones]

http://www.digitalproducer.com/2002/04_apr/news/04_15/cw_gatewaydrm.htm

Interesting stuff.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

I think the subject line is incorrect. What makes you think that anyone has any right to copy anything, unless it is in the public domain? As an author of several books, do I receive a penny for those who photocopy whole sections? Not on your Nelly! I sympathise entirely with the performers on this issue. If you want to sample before buying, then you can go along to your local music store. I would have no objection to a few snatches of a few seconds, free of charge, either, but I believe it is wrong to deprive the artists and composers of their just due.

[Dr Mordrid]

Under US law one supposedly has the right to duplicate commercially produced and legally purchased media for ones own use, such as burning your favorite songs to an MP3-CD for use in the cars player or copying MP3's to a portable player device.

The problem is that the MPAA and DVD consortium have been trying to usurp these rights by various means, one of which is trying to buy congressmen left and right to pass laws that supercede these rights.

This is what all the copy-protected audio CD controversy is all about and folks over here are getting royally PO'ed over it, especially since MP3-CD capable decks and portable players are so popular.

Dr. Mordrid

[Brian Ellis]

BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF
LITERARY AND ARTISTIC WORKS (Paris Text 1971)

Article 9

(1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form.

(2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

(3) Any sound or visual recording shall be considered as a reproduction for the purposes of this Convention.

It is clear that Art 9(2) would permit the USA to allow copies to be made for the personal, private use of the person having bought the original copyright material and thus having paid the royalties to the performer/composer, on condition that this permission was specifically enacted by Congress (was it? can anyone quote chapter and verse? or is it just a folklore belief?). On no account may anyone copy any copyright material from the Internet, unless given specific permission by the copyright holder (and this must be in writing), or use a copy for any purpose other than as enacted. This would normally entail the payment of royalties. This applies to the USA and everywhere else as defined by the Union of the Berne Convention. That this is clear in the USA is shown by the Napster and other cases, which has also established jurisprudence in the matter, as well as reinforcing the established legal base.

Anyone contravening these simple rules is as much a bandit as if they employed someone and then did not pay them their salary, because this is exactly what they are doing. The royalties paid to artists is their salary.

I've seen on this forum all sorts of diatribes against warez. Pirated music is also warez.