I’m pretty sure it is, but if I’m right, why?
Why is it legal to tape songs that a radio station is playing, but it’s not legal (I’m pretty sure) to record songs your friend is playing?
I’m fairly sure it’s not legal. You’re making an illegal copy of copyrighted material.
I’m pretty sure you’re wrong. By your rationale, it’s illegal to use a VCR or DVD recorder to copy tv shows and movies.
It would depend what country you are talking about. In Canada I’m pretty sure it would be legal as there is a tax on recordable media that pays music companies for this type of copying.
It seems it’s legal to record off the radio, to “time shift” in Australia. I’m not sure if it is legal or not in the United States. In the United States the Betamax ruling of 1984 made it a fair use of copyrighted material to record programmes off the television to be watched at a later date, however I’m not certain whether this was also applied to radio. One reason why there might be a difference is that a television programme might only be aired once but the format of radio has songs being aired on rotation. This is just supposition on my part.
To answer your original question(s) in Australia at least recording off the radio is classified as a “fair use” of copyrighted material. Copying songs from a friend is not a “fair use”.
I’d bet it’s OK as long as you use it for non-commercial, private use. DVR anyone?
There is a carve out for digital and analog tape recordings of music used for noncommercial purposes. It was part of the Audio Home Recording Act.
Time shifting video is legal. I don’t know if the same is true of audio – I don’t think there’s been a ruling – but due to the history, it’s unlikely there ever was a ruling and also likely that it would be declared legal anyway via the law on video.
Also, recording via audio tape is legal because part of the price of the tape is paid in royalties to allow for recording.
As for the difference, the time shifting exemption applies to broadcasts, which are played at set times that you might not be able to catch. However, your friend’s tape can be played at any time, so you do not have to make a copy it to listen to the music. Since you can listen to his CD without making a copy, the argument that allowed time shifting is moot.
In both the US and EU, It is legal to record songs off the radio for private use. However, the recording industry has been challenging the right to do that with digital technology, most notably in a suit against XM radio.
Cool. I just found this:
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friends
But this is weird:
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_a_movie
So, in Canada you can legally copy music that isn’t yours (from a friend’s CD) but you can’t make a back up copy of a movie you paid for. Weird.
I’m pretty sure that’s the way it is in the U.S. also, but I don’t understand why. Why is it fair to make a copy from a CD that’s not mine that someone is playing on my radio, but not make a copy from a CD that’s not mine playing on my boombox?
The other thing about time shifting is that the Court in the *Betamax * case, at best, only approved of recording, watching, and then deleting. The Court never said you could keep the copy indefinitely. I think you know this RealityChuck; I’m just clarifying for others.
Damn, I forgot about the AHRA. I read about that when doing my undergrad thesis.
I believe RealityChuck has addressed this as well as I can below
“As for the difference, the time shifting exemption applies to broadcasts, which are played at set times that you might not be able to catch. However, your friend’s tape can be played at any time, so you do not have to make a copy it to listen to the music. Since you can listen to his CD without making a copy, the argument that allowed time shifting is moot.”
Is this a fact? It may be harder to catch what songs you’re interested in when playing on the radio, but I don’t see why this should make a difference. Once done, you still have a copy of a song you didn’t pay for. Also, some radio stations announce that they will be playing a certain album side at a certain time and movies and shows on TV are certainly announced ahead of time. Taping Forrest Gump when it’s on HBO- legal. Taping your friend’s copy of Forrest Gump- illegal. Makes no sense.
In one case, you’ve already paid royalties when you purchased the recording media; in the other–not.
So it may be illegal to tape a movie played on television and not destroy or record over the tape after it’s been watched?
How’s that? The recording media is the same regardless of what the source is.
Some say it’s fair use. It probably isn’t. No court has said it is. We discussed this here: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcopyright2.htm
Review the AHRA, and you’ll see that Congress disagrees.
Congress disagrees with what? You said, “In one case, you’ve already paid royalties when you purchased the recording media; in the other–not.”
If I buy a a blank VCR tape, I can tape a movie on TV with it or a movie from a DVD with it. Are you saying that Congress says the royalties were or weren’t paid for when I bought the tape depending on what source I use to record the same movie?
It’s called the *audio * home recording act. It imposes a royalty on . . . . *audio * tapes, and only exempts recordings of music. If you can fit the *audio * tape into your *video * cassette recorder , let’s talk.