# the new "rip proof" cd's coming out... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 3, 2001, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120 "2001-10-03T03:55:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/61 "2001-10-04T03:42:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Poloin99 \* > > \*\*I would go to the library (Napster) and copy the chapter. \*\* > > If I’m not mistaken, photocopying copywritten material is illegal as well. \*\* You’re kidding, right? ---
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/62 "2001-10-04T11:48:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Poloin99 \* > > \*\*I would go to the library (Napster) and copy the chapter. \*\* > > If I’m not mistaken, photocopying copywritten material is illegal as well. \*\* There is no such word as “copywritten”, and whether it is illegal to photocopy copyrighted material depends on whether the copying falls within Section 107 fair use, or is licensed. This is a nonsimple question. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/63 "2001-10-04T12:07:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > \*\* > [QUOTEpldennison > > > [@](#): > > > > ## quote: > > > > ## Originally posted by Whack-a-Mole I’m looking for a cite for this but IIRC the record industry has shown no slump in sales since Napster and the whole MP3 downloading thing got started. > > > > Not according to the RIAA’s midyear reports. Unit shipments of CDs from midyear 200o to 2001 are down 5.3%, representing $5.5 billion. > > That is relevant only if Napster started in 2000. My understanding is that it was around a while before that. Unless you have a cite disproving that, Whack-a-Mole’s point stands. \*\* Yes and no–you’re correct that, if Napster started up before that, then it’s start precedes any slump or perceived slump in record sales. I concede that point. However, if one is going to propose a _connection_ between Napster and record sales ( and I am not–I think they’re completely unrelated), one will have to do better than to simply point to numbers and engage in _post hoc_ conjecture. That’s not how causality is established. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/64 "2001-10-04T12:16:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > > \*\* > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > \*Originally posted by Poloin99 \* > > > \*\*I would go to the library (Napster) and copy the chapter. \*\* > > > > If I’m not mistaken, photocopying copywritten material is illegal as well. \*\* > > You’re kidding, right? \*\* WTF? From John Rawls’ _A Theory Of Justice_ (O.U.P. 1973) > [@](#): > > All rights reserved. **No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press**. Within the UK, exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair dealing for the purpose of research of private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1998, **or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of the licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency**. [http://www.cla.co.uk/index.html](http://www.cla.co.uk/index.html) It is indeed illegal to photocopy published material unless you are covered by the above exceptions (in the UK at least). Same applies to recorded music. – Quirm ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/65 "2001-10-04T12:31:42Z")
(cough) Fair Use (cough) Or, do you not have that in the UK? Regardless of what their scarecrow text says, you can make copies within the bounds of Fair Use here in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/66 "2001-10-04T12:34:50Z")
What I mean to say is, AFAIK, our version of Fair Use allows for very limited photocopying - as seen in every single school and University course that I or anyone else has likely ever been in. To claim that all photcopying is illegal is not correct. ---
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/67 "2001-10-04T12:38:47Z")
It’s the existence of the right to make copies without a license under fair use that drives the media producers completely nuts. The DMCA, unrippable CDs, encrypted DVDs, and all these other anti-consumer things are nothing but a bald-faced attempt by media producers to **stamp out fair use**. They are trying, by technology, to take away what Congress will not, by law. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/68 "2001-10-04T13:00:17Z")
Hmm - ich bin kein Lawyer, so could someone p’raps explain what counts as fair use? The impression I got from **Poloin99** ’s post above was that if, for example, there was a particular recipe in a cookbook which I wanted, but I didn’t want to buy the whole book, I would be perfectly entitled to pop down to the local library and copy the recipe I wanted. Same applies to Napster and individual tracks on CDs. Would that count as fair use? (Genuine question - I have no idea if it would). Academic photocopying is one thing (although even that, as **Anthracite** sez, allows for only limited amounts of copying) - but (at the risk of being unfair in my interpretation of **Poloin99** ’s post) I’m not sure that’s what the majority of Napster users are engaged in… Unless I were a Media Studies student or summat it’s hard to imagine that I could claim ‘fair use’ when I rip off the latest Hollywood DVD…? I’m not talking about making back-up copies in case the goldfish chews the originals or anything like that (do you guys have a ‘constitutional right’ to be able to do that?), but rather people going out purposefully to obtain music/literature/whatever without paying for it (which is what **Poloin99** indicated he would do). – Quirm ---
**Author:** ![musicguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@musicguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/musicguy)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/69 "2001-10-04T15:43:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\*What I mean to say is, AFAIK, our version of Fair Use allows for very limited photocopying - as seen in every single school and University course that I or anyone else has likely ever been in. To claim that all photcopying is illegal is not correct. \*\* Yes, I will agree that all photocopying is not illegal but in the context we were discussing, as to whether it would be ok to copy a chapter of a book to avoid buying the book, is not fair use, AFAIK. And if I’m wrong, I’m sure I’ll be corrected 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![musicguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@musicguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/musicguy)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/70 "2001-10-04T16:23:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KellyM \* > \*\*It’s the existence of the right to make copies without a license under fair use that drives the media producers completely nuts. \*\* Maybe the reason it drives them nuts is because of the blatant abuse by people who claim its their right to make a copy of something, which it is, then continue to make copies for their next door neighbor, their co-worker, their friends, etc… How would you feel if it was your book, song, software, etc. Everyone thinks by stealing this stuff, they are only hurting the media giants who can afford it. But that is not the case, it hurts real, hard working people, who depend on this income. Maybe it doesn’t hurt Madonna, but we are all not Madonna (for which I am grateful). ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/71 "2001-10-04T16:32:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > Jesus H. Christ, is that even an argument? Your attitude is not appropiate for GD. If you wish to be rude, the proper place would be the Pit. I would think that after more than a year, you would be able to figure that out for yourself. > [@](#): > > Tell me you don’t seriously believe that I mean “freedom” to refer to a person’s ability to physically move or perform an action. Considering what the word _means_, yes I do. > [@](#): > > Considering that the topic had to deal with “rights”, I don’t see how an intelligent mind could possibly misconstrue the meaning. I didn’t notice the wrod “right” mentioned even once before your post. Could you provide an example of such an instance? Here’s the discussion as I remember it (bolding mine): Critical1: > [@](#): > > …it affects our **freedom** (at least as far as ripping for personal use which I do alot of) … You > [@](#): > > it affects our **freedom** How? [/quote] bdgr > [@](#): > > By **limiting** ripping legally purchased cds to mp3 for our personal use… Critical1 > [@](#): > > the cd’s will be **unplayable** on a pc… You see a discussion of **freedom** and **abilities** and you decide that they’re talking about rights? Seems to me that **you** are the one misconstruing the argument. Critical1 made it quite clear that he was talking about freedom. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > That is relevant only if Napster started in 2000. My understanding is that it was around a while before that. Unless you have a cite disproving that, Whack-a-Mole’s point stands. > > That is the most anally simplistic view of the events I have ever seen. Whack-a-Mole said that he did not know of any drop in sales **since Napster began**. pldennison said that there had been a drop in sales **after Napster began**. I pointed out that this did not disprove Whack-a-Mole’s statement. I fail to see what anuses have to do with this. > [@](#): > > Napster did not zoom to popularity overnight… indeed, it was relegated to it’s original purpose (allowing amateur musicians swap music/ideas) for a long time. I never claimed that. But Whack-A-Mole’s statement had to do with the beginning of Napster. If pldennison believed that that was the wrong time period to focus on, he should have stated that explicitly rather than giving data for the time period **he** thought was important without mentioning that it’s a different period. > [@](#): > > Only when the Mp3 boom hit (late 1999/early 2000) did Napster catch on… and when that happened, the music industry started feeling the loss of revenue, and as a result they tried to get Napster shut down. That’s a blatantly post hoc argument. pldennison > [@](#): > > However, if one is going to propose a connection between Napster and record sales ( and I am not–I think they’re completely unrelated), one will have to do better than to simply point to numbers and engage in post hoc conjecture. You seem to have lost track of the full history of this discussion. A review: MusicGuy implies that Napster has hurt record sales. Whack-A-Mole challenges anyone to find data showing a slump in sales since Napster began. You posted data showing a slump after Napster began. I stated that those data are not relevant to Whack-A-Mole’s statement. In other words, I was arguing **against** the post hoc argument that since there was a slump in some period following the introduction of Napster, it must have been because of Napster. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/72 "2001-10-04T16:37:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > Jesus H. Christ, is that even an argument? Your attitude is not appropiate for GD. If you wish to be rude, the proper place would be the Pit. I would think that after more than a year, you would be able to figure that out for yourself. > [@](#): > > Tell me you don’t seriously believe that I mean “freedom” to refer to a person’s ability to physically move or perform an action. Considering what the word _means_, yes I do. > [@](#): > > Considering that the topic had to deal with “rights”, I don’t see how an intelligent mind could possibly misconstrue the meaning. I didn’t notice the wrod “right” mentioned even once before your post. Could you provide an example of such an instance? Here’s the discussion as I remember it (bolding mine): Critical1: > [@](#): > > …it affects our **freedom** (at least as far as ripping for personal use which I do alot of) … You > [@](#): > > it affects our **freedom** How? [/quote] bdgr > [@](#): > > By **limiting** ripping legally purchased cds to mp3 for our personal use… Critical1 > [@](#): > > the cd’s will be **unplayable** on a pc… You see a discussion of **freedom** and **abilities** and you decide that they’re talking about rights? Seems to me that **you** are the one misconstruing the argument. Critical1 made it quite clear that he was talking about freedom. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > That is relevant only if Napster started in 2000. My understanding is that it was around a while before that. Unless you have a cite disproving that, Whack-a-Mole’s point stands. > > That is the most anally simplistic view of the events I have ever seen. Whack-a-Mole said that he did not know of any drop in sales **since Napster began**. pldennison said that there had been a drop in sales **after Napster began**. I pointed out that this did not disprove Whack-a-Mole’s statement. I fail to see what anuses have to do with this. > [@](#): > > Napster did not zoom to popularity overnight… indeed, it was relegated to it’s original purpose (allowing amateur musicians swap music/ideas) for a long time. I never claimed that. But Whack-A-Mole’s statement had to do with the beginning of Napster. If pldennison believed that that was the wrong time period to focus on, he should have stated that explicitly rather than giving data for the time period **he** thought was important without mentioning that it’s a different period. > [@](#): > > Only when the Mp3 boom hit (late 1999/early 2000) did Napster catch on… and when that happened, the music industry started feeling the loss of revenue, and as a result they tried to get Napster shut down. That’s a blatantly post hoc argument. pldennison > [@](#): > > However, if one is going to propose a connection between Napster and record sales ( and I am not–I think they’re completely unrelated), one will have to do better than to simply point to numbers and engage in post hoc conjecture. You seem to have lost track of the full history of this discussion. A review: MusicGuy implies that Napster has hurt record sales. Whack-A-Mole challenges anyone to find data showing a slump in sales since Napster began. You posted data showing a slump after Napster began. I stated that those data are not relevant to Whack-A-Mole’s statement. In other words, I was arguing **against** the post hoc argument that since there was a slump in some period following the introduction of Napster, it must have been because of Napster. ---
**Author:** ![Tejota](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/958977/32.png) [@Tejota](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tejota)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/73 "2001-10-04T19:29:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Poloin99 \* > > \*\*I would go to the library (Napster) and copy the chapter. \*\* > > If I’m not mistaken, photocopying copywritten material is illegal as well. \*\* You are indeed mistaken. Photocopying can be illegal, it can also be legal. It depends on the purpose of the copy. ---
**Author:** ![musicguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@musicguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/musicguy)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/74 "2001-10-04T19:58:29Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by Tejota \* \*\* > [@](#): > > You are indeed mistaken. Photocopying can be illegal, it can also be legal. It depends on the purpose of the copy. \*\* I understand “fair usage”. I just don’t think it is applicable to what most people are doing when they are copying media. In the context of what we were discussing, copying a chapter of a book to avoid buying the book would not be legal unless it was for eduational purposes, which wasn’t what we were talking about. ---
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/75 "2001-10-04T21:05:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > **How would you feel if it was your book, song, software, etc.** I write software. I’ve even had stuff of mine “stolen”. Nonetheless, I refuse to accept that we have to banish fair use in order to protect IP creators. I note that there are IP creators out there that want to make it so that you CANNOT READ A BOOK ALOUD TO YOUR CHILD without acquiring a special “reading-aloud” license. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/76 "2001-10-04T21:39:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Quirm \* > \*\*The impression I got from **Poloin99** ’s post above was that if, for example, there was a particular recipe in a cookbook which I wanted, but I didn’t want to buy the whole book, I would be perfectly entitled to pop down to the local library and copy the recipe I wanted. Same applies to Napster and individual tracks on CDs. > > Would that count as fair use? (Genuine question - I have no idea if it would).\*\* Probably a bad subject matter choice for your example. Copyright protects creative works. **You cannot copyright an idea, only an expression of an idea.** As I recall, recipes are usually looked upon as lists or collections of facts, and facts cannot be copyrighted. There would have to be something mighty creative about the way that recipe was expressed for it to be protectible by copyright. So instead let’s say it’s a one-page short story. If you’re making a single copy for your own use, you’re probably okay, because you’re not worth going after, in the eyes of the author. Even if you’re making 30 copies, enough to give out to your entire college class, you’ll probably be fine, because copyright tends to be pretty lenient when the copying is done for educational purposes. If you’re making hundreds of copies and selling them on the street, you got a problem. ---
**Author:** ![musicguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@musicguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/musicguy)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/77 "2001-10-04T21:40:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KellyM \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by musicguy \* > > **How would you feel if it was your book, song, software, etc.** > > I write software. I’ve even had stuff of mine “stolen”. Nonetheless, I refuse to accept that we have to banish fair use in order to protect IP creators. > > I note that there are IP creators out there that want to make it so that you CANNOT READ A BOOK ALOUD TO YOUR CHILD without acquiring a special “reading-aloud” license. \*\* You know, I’m really not against fair use either but I wouldn’t be surprised if it is banished, given all of the abuse. I couldn’t care less if someone takes a CD that I have created and converts it to MP3 so they can listen to it on the computer or portable player, whatever… But when I see my friends and my own material on Napster, knowing that we will not get paid for the downloads, it irks me. Somehow, many people have determined that it is not only ok, but some sort of “right” to take for free what is not theirs. These people would punish their children for stealing a candy bar, but don’t think twice about loading pirated software onto a computer. Do people really believe that they can justify this becuase they don’t like the company(s) that own the rights to it. I really just don’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![Seraphim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ad7895/32.png) [@Seraphim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seraphim)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/78 "2001-10-04T22:42:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Critical1 \* > \*\* > call me crazy but if I run a jack from my stereo to my sound card wont I still be able to record any cd I want? > > and do they really think there won’t be a way around this inside of 2 weeks?\*\* From the posted article: > [@](#): > > Committed pirates will eventually find a way around any digital protections, even if it is simply “holding a microphone up to the speakers,” said Jonathan Usher, group product manager for Microsoft’s Digital Media Division. and > [@](#): > > “I think the reality here is that none of these (CD copy-protection) techniques is going to be successful in the long term,” said Jupiter Research analyst Aram Sinnreich. “They’re fraught with technical difficulties, and if they did surmount those, they would meet with a severe consumer backlash.” > > “A lot of copy protection around (CD) audio is really a stopgap solution,” said an executive of one major label. So the answers to both your questions are yes and yes. Executives are well aware that their protection schemes won’t stop the committed pirate, so the best they can hope for is to frustrate the casual user. 2 weeks? Bah, I’d say a day or two at most. I remember when the first batch of cd-roms encoded with the new Safedisc 2 anti-copy protection was released, and yet on _the same day_ I saw people posting those cd images in a newsgroup. ---
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/79 "2001-10-04T23:37:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Max Torque \* > \*\*So instead let’s say it’s a one-page short story. If you’re making a single copy for your own use, you’re probably okay, because you’re not worth going after, in the eyes of the author. Even if you’re making 30 copies, enough to give out to your entire college class, you’ll probably be fine, because copyright tends to be pretty lenient when the copying is done for educational purposes. If you’re making hundreds of copies and selling them on the street, you got a problem. \*\* But if the RIAA gets its way (which musicguy seems to think is an OK situation) and fair use goes away, you won’t be allowed to make even that one copy for personal use. Hell, if fair use went away, I wouldn’t even be allowed to **quote a preceding message** on a message board. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2001, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120/80 "2001-10-04T23:39:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Max Torque \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Quirm \* > > \*\*The impression I got from **Poloin99** ’s post above was that if, for example, there was a particular recipe in a cookbook which I wanted, but I didn’t want to buy the whole book, I would be perfectly entitled to pop down to the local library and copy the recipe I wanted. Same applies to Napster and individual tracks on CDs. > > > > Would that count as fair use? (Genuine question - I have no idea if it would).\*\* > > Probably a bad subject matter choice for your example. Copyright protects creative works. **You cannot copyright an idea, only an expression of an idea.** As I recall, recipes are usually looked upon as lists or collections of facts, and facts cannot be copyrighted. There would have to be something mighty creative about the way that recipe was expressed for it to be protectible by copyright. > > So instead let’s say it’s a one-page short story. If you’re making a single copy for your own use, you’re probably okay, because you’re not worth going after, in the eyes of the author. Even if you’re making 30 copies, enough to give out to your entire college class, you’ll probably be fine, because copyright tends to be pretty lenient when the copying is done for educational purposes. If you’re making hundreds of copies and selling them on the street, you got a problem. \*\* Cheers for the clarification - I bet there have been some interesting legal wrangles over recipe authorship / copyright issues 🙂 Just a quick question (for my own curiosity, sort of thing): if I did indeed photocopy the short story for my own use would I be **technically** breaking the terms of the ‘fair use’ agreement (but on a level too trivial to be worth bothering about) or are indivduals in such cases actually **exempt** from the requirements? Or does it depend on the context in which I make the copies (if I am a genuine student or whatever)? Thanks, – Quirm [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-rip-proof-cds-coming-out/85120.md?page=5)