Stop the Surveillance Bills!
Copyright is Dead, Part 2
The original contents of this post have been removed, as they may not have contained all pertinent information. That information was not necessarily available to me, or to the public.
It has come to my attention that noncommercial copying of digital music recordings may not be an infringement under Title 17 of the U.S. Code, "Copyrights." I apologize for any confusion I may have caused or any mistaken impression I may have given.
Please see the retraction I have published on my blog, at http://the_scrivener.blogspot.com/2007/06/retraction.html.
It has come to my attention that noncommercial copying of digital music recordings may not be an infringement under Title 17 of the U.S. Code, "Copyrights." I apologize for any confusion I may have caused or any mistaken impression I may have given.
Please see the retraction I have published on my blog, at http://the_scrivener.blogspot.com/2007/06/retraction.html.
posted by Mitchell L. Silverman | 11:58 AM
25 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
amazing....you really have to have better things to do than actually take time out of your day to pursue this. If you don't, get a hobby.
To the "you've got to have better things to do with your time" anonymous commenter:
A) As a lawyer myself, I can say that it probably took about six seconds for Mr. Silverman to compose this letter.
B) What exactly do you imagine would be a better use of Mr. Silverman's time than this protest of abusive corporate practices?
C) Would you care to elaborate on why you apparently believe that such abusive corporate practices should not be publicly debated?
Thank you in advance for what I am sure will be an informed, well-reasoned response.
I think this is a brilliant way of following up. Sure it may not win any wars, but every bit of pressure helps. Don't let the trolls (ie. RIAA desk jockeys with nothing better to do between suing little girls) get you down.
If everyone could just push a little...
I think this is a fine hobby. The RIAA suing their customers over and over is ridiculous. Surely the president's daughters are not above the law. Though, maybe they feel they are after years of watching Pop illegally fire judges who don't vote for a certain party, and detaining people without any actual arrests or pesky trials, and illegal wire tapping. And making us safer by illegally outing CIA agents. You wouldn't be able to blame them if they thought that laws don't count for them.
Hilarity! I'm glad that there are those in the legal profession with a quick with and a sense of humor. We all know the RIAA won't do anything about this issue, highlighting their own faulty practices. However, this does make an excellent point and I hope that your letter recieves more attention in days to come.
Spectacular! The brighter a light you can shine on both the absurdity of current law and the hideous double standards with which it is applied, the better. It's hard to think of a better way for a lawyer to spend his or her day!
Oh god oh god, PLEASE let the national media pick up on this and kick it around the circuit for a bit.
Good on you Sir, I say we should continue to highlight areas of double standerds. I am not fond of the current political crap going on in washington, nor of the crap that RIAA is doing. GO GET 'EM!!!!! You've got my support
If the twin daughters gave Dad the originals containing the 12 songs they burned, then Dad now owns* the original music and has executed his fair use right to listen to them via a mix CD. I'm sure they did that, right? Doesn't everyone do that when they make a mix CD for someone? Cuz otherwise it's illegal? I think? Right? Hello?
Getting the RIAA to even acknowledge this incident would be impossible. A better strategy would be to call on the twins to come forward and admit guilt since the administration's implied support with the RIAAs tactics (by not stopping it) means they are obligated to pay when it's their turn.
I wanna see the bush twins pay $50k per song, maybe then some laws will change, go get them, you got my support.
I hope I'm wrong on this, but wouldn't "The Twins" be safe burning a mix CD if they bought the music as individual tracks (say from the iTunes Music Store) and burned the compliation?
Sir, great idea for exposing inequalities in the administration of justice.
Please start an online petition that will go to the RIAA and Attorney General's office. We can then see some startling inaction.
With any luck, now that this is on Fark.com, Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert will see it and do something with it, possibly forcing the networks to at least mention it. it's too good an opportunity to expose two hypocrisies (RIAA and Bush) with one story.
A lawyer should know the law better than you do. Private noncommercial copying is explicitly allowed in the US, that's why there is a special tax on 'audio CDs' which are identical to data CDs, except they cost more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy#United_States
Your understanding of the law is WRONG, as repeated here several times (including the post above), sadly ignored by other posters. Your argument has NO LEGAL BASIS, unless you can show that the Bush twins are ripping songs from file-sharing.
You are allowed to make copies for your own personal use. You ARE NOT allowed to make copies for ditribution to others whether for profit or for free.
This is from the Music Publishers Association website:
The following are expressly prohibited:
* Copying TO AVOID PURCHASE
* Copying music for any kind of performance (note emergency exception below)
* Copying without including copyright notice
* Copying TO CREATE ANTHOLOGIES OR COMPILATIONSJSCXZZQ
* Reproducing material designed to be consumable such as workbooks, standardized tests and answer sheets
* Charging students beyond the actual cost involved in making copies as permitted
seriously... get a job, but i don't suggest in the legal profession... doesn't look like you're ready for it.
Anybody know if Hillary is using an original CD or a ripped MP3 for that stupid Celene Dion song? Let's go after all of them!
michael kors handbags, kate spade, nike air max, michael kors outlet online, nike air max, replica watches, cheap oakley sunglasses, uggs on sale, louis vuitton outlet online, ralph lauren outlet, ralph lauren polo, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet online, michael kors outlet, burberry factory outlet, burberry outlet, oakley sunglasses, louboutin uk, nike outlet, uggs on sale, oakley sunglasses, tiffany jewelry, cheap jordans, tiffany jewelry, prada handbags, michael kors outlet store, louis vuitton, longchamp bags, louis vuitton outlet, gucci handbags, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton handbags, christian louboutin, louboutin shoes, tory burch outlet, christian louboutin, prada outlet, oakley sunglasses, michael kors, uggs on sale, longchamp outlet, uggs outlet, ray ban sunglasses, uggs outlet, replica watches, nike free
coach outlet, new balance, louboutin pas cher, polo lacoste pas cher, nike roshe run pas cher, lululemon outlet, true religion jeans, coach purses, coach outlet, sac guess pas cher, vanessa bruno pas cher, polo ralph lauren uk, kate spade outlet, nike free, burberry pas cher, longchamp pas cher, nike air max, true religion outlet, nike tn pas cher, hollister uk, michael kors, michael kors, north face pas cher, true religion outlet, timberland pas cher, coach outlet store online, nike air max uk, north face uk, nike free pas cher, abercrombie and fitch, hermes pas cher, vans pas cher, converse, mulberry uk, abercrombie and fitch UK, jordan pas cher, nike air max pas cher, michael kors outlet online, nike roshe uk, michael kors uk, ray ban uk, true religion outlet, lunette oakley pas cher, lunette ray ban pas cher, nike air max uk
north face outlet store
true religion outlet
nike sneakers
nike outlet online
pandora outlet
nike outlet online
canada goose coats
nike shoes
coach factory outlet
nike outlet
yolo
Post a Comment
<< Home