I bought the new Barenaked Ladies’ cd, and I want to pull some of the songs off and put them onto my mp3 player. I’ve not yet checked to see if there’s any copy protection on the disc, but a few thoughts just struck me and I wanted to ask them while I’m thinking of them.
Is it illegal for me to follow through with the above process? I’m under the impression that I can make one or two copies for myself after buying the cd, but my memory’s fuzzy on that.
If it’s legal, how is the label not depriving me of my right as a consumer by not allowing me to make those copies?
I used to use MusicMatch Jukebox to convert files from one format to another (i.e., .wma to .mp3). I’ve since done a drive wipe and no longer have access to MMJ. Can anyone recommend a program that will rip to an .mp3 format (preferably a free or shareware program)? I’m under the impression that Windows Media Player 9 will not let me rip songs to .mp3, or if it will, that it will not let me subsequently do anything with those songs.
First of all, copy-protection is not very wide spead yet on cd’s. Assuming that your disc in not copyprotected…
It is perfectly legal for you to put the cd on whatever device in whatever format you want (tape, mp3, etc). This is ‘fair use’ and should apply to every disc you own. Theoretically speaking, the optimal use of ‘fair use’ is to make a backup for yourself, and then listen to the backup - thus preserving the original from damage. These laws were first established when VCR’s came on the market.
If the CD is copy protected, then yes, the label is depriving you of your right to make a backup.
But, as with nealy everything, it is still possible to make a non-digital (lossy) copy of your cd. Remember how to make a mix tape? Hook up your cd player to the ‘line in’ jack on your computer, record the cd, break up the tracks, and save as mp3. Quite a pain in the ass if you ask me…
Open Source, can rip to mp3, ogg, and flac(?) files. Can label tracks automatically, can rip partial tracks, and a host of other cool features. And completely free.
I purchased a CD via the internet. On arrival I could not read it with any of 5 different burner/drives in 3 different PC’s. A complaint resulted in a second CD which was unreadable as the first. A friend took it home and opened it with a demo version of Nero. Voila it was a Mac version of the information I had ordered.
Re: Copy protection…
Old Chinese proverb states:
“What one fool can do another can.” Translate to:
What one programmer can copy protect another can unprotect!
It won’t be long before some sa programmer will do just that.
I purchased a CD via the internet. On arrival I could not read it with any of 5 different burner/drives in 3 different PC’s. A complaint resulted in a second CD which was unreadable as the first. A friend took it home and opened it with a demo version of Nero. Voila it was a Mac version of the information I had ordered.
Re: Copy protection…
Old Chinese proverb states:
“What one fool can do another can.” Translate to:
What one programmer can copy protect another can unprotect!
It won’t be long before some sa programmer will do just that.
I don’t deal with copyright law on a day-to-day basis, but my understanding is that in the US it is a criminal offence to circumvent anti-piracy measures. Making copies for yourself (not for commercial or public distribution) used to be fine under the fair use exemptions of copyright law. However, for all member states of WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), including the US, who have enacted legislation similar to the DMCA in compliance with the Geneva Copyright Treaty 1996, simply circumventing copy protection is now prima facie a criminal offence. So if your CD contains measures which restrict your ability to copy it, you will be committing a criminal offence by circumventing those measures, even if its just for your own personal use.
As I said, this is just my understanding of the current US position, but if it is correct then the legislation seems excessively broad – in fact broader than necessary to prevent counterfeiting and piracy and acts which people would consider bona fide copyright infringement.
I’m curious to see where this conflict between fair use and anti-piracy leads. I would imagine it will only take one big class action suit against a label depriving people of fair use to force the labels to figure out another way of doing things.