Professional Web Applications Themes

iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection - Mac Applications & Software

When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal? If so, PC users could benefit from iTunes. They could 'legalize' their song collections by downloading songs from iTunes. They don't even need to be able to play the iTunes format--they just need to keep their receipts. What do you think?...

  1. #1

    Default iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal? If so, PC users could
    benefit from iTunes. They could 'legalize' their song collections by
    downloading songs from iTunes. They don't even need to be able to
    play the iTunes format--they just need to keep their receipts. What
    do you think?
    Hein H Guest

  2. #2

    Default iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal? If so, PC users could
    benefit from iTunes. They could 'legalize' their song collections by
    downloading songs from iTunes. They don't even need to be able to
    play the iTunes format--they just need to keep their receipts. What
    do you think?
    Hein H Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 10:02:57 -0400, Davoud <starsky.net> wrote:
    >Hein H:
    >> When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    >> downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    >
    >*****
    >
    >Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    >myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    >back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    >stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    >the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    One's IP, the other isn't. If you have the CD, you can make backups
    of it for personal use. I see no reason why an individual song
    wouldn't be treated the same way - backups for personal use are OK.
    In that case, the backup MP3 file for personal use (which one can
    easily make anyway) would be fine.
    foo Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 10:02:57 -0400, Davoud <starsky.net> wrote:
    >Hein H:
    >> When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    >> downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    >
    >*****
    >
    >Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    >myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    >back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    >stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    >the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    One's IP, the other isn't. If you have the CD, you can make backups
    of it for personal use. I see no reason why an individual song
    wouldn't be treated the same way - backups for personal use are OK.
    In that case, the backup MP3 file for personal use (which one can
    easily make anyway) would be fine.
    foo Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <290620031002575789%starsky.net>, Davoud <starsky.net>
    wrote:

    :> Hein H:
    :> > When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    :> > downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    :>
    :> *****
    :>
    :> Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    :> myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    :> back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    :> stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    :> the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    :>
    :> Davoud

    You don't have to be an attorney to glean the answer to his question.
    The "previously downloaded mp3 copy" is just another file on the system.
    The newly downloaded (and legally purchased) file from the iTunes music
    store is NOT in the mp3 format.

    So if he were to download an illegal copy of a movie, for instance, from
    a newsgroup, and then purchase a legal DVD copy of the same movie, you
    might have a better ogy -- the latter has a different format and
    legally enforces copyright and anticopy schemes.

    = Steve =
    --
    Steve W. Jackson
    Montgomery, Alabama
    Steve W. Jackson Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <290620031002575789%starsky.net>, Davoud <starsky.net>
    wrote:

    :> Hein H:
    :> > When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    :> > downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    :>
    :> *****
    :>
    :> Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    :> myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    :> back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    :> stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    :> the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    :>
    :> Davoud

    You don't have to be an attorney to glean the answer to his question.
    The "previously downloaded mp3 copy" is just another file on the system.
    The newly downloaded (and legally purchased) file from the iTunes music
    store is NOT in the mp3 format.

    So if he were to download an illegal copy of a movie, for instance, from
    a newsgroup, and then purchase a legal DVD copy of the same movie, you
    might have a better ogy -- the latter has a different format and
    legally enforces copyright and anticopy schemes.

    = Steve =
    --
    Steve W. Jackson
    Montgomery, Alabama
    Steve W. Jackson Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    how will the riaa find out you have a couple of mp3's on your box
    without the originals???


    Cyberia Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    how will the riaa find out you have a couple of mp3's on your box
    without the originals???


    Cyberia Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <290620031002575789%starsky.net>, Davoud <starsky.net>
    wrote:
    > Hein H:
    > > When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    > > downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    >
    > *****
    >
    > Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    > myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    > back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    > stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    > the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    >
    > Davoud
    I am no attorney either...

    People have to work twice as much to make 2 cars. Artists sings only
    once, song is duplicated with one simple mouse click. Not a good
    ogy...

    Anyway, is the OP's question relevant? why not delete the illegal copy
    and use the iTunes copy???

    BTW: I read something like this somewhere on the 'net...

    If you were able to duplicate a "real" thing such as a house, for $0.25,
    but you would break a copyright law, because you basically steal the
    design, what would happen? I bet they would change the copyright law,
    you don't want to have homeless people after all, do you? Anyway, I am
    not encouraging theft, just wonder if the copyright law is perfect. I
    think not...
    chibitul Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <290620031002575789%starsky.net>, Davoud <starsky.net>
    wrote:
    > Hein H:
    > > When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    > > downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal...
    >
    > *****
    >
    > Not being an attorney, I don't know the answer to that. But I ask
    > myself this: If I were to steal a new car from a dealer's lot, then go
    > back to the dealer and buy a new car identical to the one that I had
    > stolen, would that erase the theft and make me the legitimate owner of
    > the car that I had stolen? I think not.
    >
    > Davoud
    I am no attorney either...

    People have to work twice as much to make 2 cars. Artists sings only
    once, song is duplicated with one simple mouse click. Not a good
    ogy...

    Anyway, is the OP's question relevant? why not delete the illegal copy
    and use the iTunes copy???

    BTW: I read something like this somewhere on the 'net...

    If you were able to duplicate a "real" thing such as a house, for $0.25,
    but you would break a copyright law, because you basically steal the
    design, what would happen? I bet they would change the copyright law,
    you don't want to have homeless people after all, do you? Anyway, I am
    not encouraging theft, just wonder if the copyright law is perfect. I
    think not...
    chibitul Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    >how will the riaa find out you have a couple of mp3's on your box
    >without the originals???
    When you trade it with others from a supernode.

    I have tens of thousands of MP3s, yet all of them were ripped from my own
    personal CD collection. I paid for them. I really do not like that people
    assume that they all came off of napster or kazaa or limewire, which I have
    never used because I have so many.
    GrapeApe Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <4070b119.0306290442.196fd454posting.google.com >,
    Hein H <scundal> wrote:
    >When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    >downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal?
    I, but so far as I know, it's not a "copy" that is or isn't legal, it's
    an "act of copying", and the previous violation was still a violation.

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2003, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / [email]seebsplethora.net[/email]
    [url]http://www.seebs.net/log/[/url] - YA blog. [url]http://www.seebs.net/[/url] - homepage.
    C/Unix wizard, pro-commerce radical, spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
    Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: [url]http://www.plethora.net/[/url]
    Seebs Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In article <4070b119.0306290442.196fd454posting.google.com >,
    Hein H <scundal> wrote:
    >When you purchase a song through iTunes, does your previously
    >downloaded mp3 copy of the song become legal?
    I, but so far as I know, it's not a "copy" that is or isn't legal, it's
    an "act of copying", and the previous violation was still a violation.

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2003, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / [email]seebsplethora.net[/email]
    [url]http://www.seebs.net/log/[/url] - YA blog. [url]http://www.seebs.net/[/url] - homepage.
    C/Unix wizard, pro-commerce radical, spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
    Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: [url]http://www.plethora.net/[/url]
    Seebs Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    [email]shaminotechie.com[/email] (David C.) wrote in news:m2el1cvmbh.fsfqqqq.invalid:
    > The RIAA has repeatedly said that when you buy music, you don't own
    > the content of the tape/record/CD, but have a license to the songs.
    > So when you purchase the song (assuming it's identical - same album,
    > same performance, etc.) then you have purchased a license.
    If the RIAA has ever said that (and I can't recall it ever saying that),
    then it's wrong. You don't buy a license when you buy a CD, you buy a
    CD.
    > On the other hand, the RIAA _also_ wants to prosecute people who
    > download songs that they have arelady purchased on records and
    > cassettes, and they don't provide any form of free/cheap media
    > replacements if your record/tape/CD dies.
    What are your sources for these claims? When has the RIAA ever indicated
    it wants to sue people who download songs at all? They want to prosecute
    people who are sharing files.
    > As for the actual law, who knows? It doesn't really matter. The
    > precedents set up by court cases have proven that the lawmakers have
    > no power here. Whatever the RIAA can convince a court of is the law,
    > and you have no rights, period.
    That's a mighty defeatist approach, as well as an entirely inaccurate
    one. The precedents set by court cases have time and time again carved
    out a roadmap for fair use principles of copyright law. Why can you
    videotape TV programs? Because of court rulings. Why can you use
    portable MP3 players? Because of court rulings. Why can you make copies
    of your music for your own use? Because of court rulings. Why hasn't
    P2P been outlawed? Because of court rulings. I think you got it
    backwards -- the only thing stopping the copyright industries from
    locking down content as tightly as they would like *are* the courts, not
    the lawmakers, many of whom get sizeable campaign contributions from
    organizations like the RIAA, MPAA, and BSA. But those people you can
    vote out of office, if you bother to pay attention to what's going on.


    --
    Michael
    New York, NY USA
    Mcubed Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    [email]shaminotechie.com[/email] (David C.) wrote in news:m2el1cvmbh.fsfqqqq.invalid:
    > The RIAA has repeatedly said that when you buy music, you don't own
    > the content of the tape/record/CD, but have a license to the songs.
    > So when you purchase the song (assuming it's identical - same album,
    > same performance, etc.) then you have purchased a license.
    If the RIAA has ever said that (and I can't recall it ever saying that),
    then it's wrong. You don't buy a license when you buy a CD, you buy a
    CD.
    > On the other hand, the RIAA _also_ wants to prosecute people who
    > download songs that they have arelady purchased on records and
    > cassettes, and they don't provide any form of free/cheap media
    > replacements if your record/tape/CD dies.
    What are your sources for these claims? When has the RIAA ever indicated
    it wants to sue people who download songs at all? They want to prosecute
    people who are sharing files.
    > As for the actual law, who knows? It doesn't really matter. The
    > precedents set up by court cases have proven that the lawmakers have
    > no power here. Whatever the RIAA can convince a court of is the law,
    > and you have no rights, period.
    That's a mighty defeatist approach, as well as an entirely inaccurate
    one. The precedents set by court cases have time and time again carved
    out a roadmap for fair use principles of copyright law. Why can you
    videotape TV programs? Because of court rulings. Why can you use
    portable MP3 players? Because of court rulings. Why can you make copies
    of your music for your own use? Because of court rulings. Why hasn't
    P2P been outlawed? Because of court rulings. I think you got it
    backwards -- the only thing stopping the copyright industries from
    locking down content as tightly as they would like *are* the courts, not
    the lawmakers, many of whom get sizeable campaign contributions from
    organizations like the RIAA, MPAA, and BSA. But those people you can
    vote out of office, if you bother to pay attention to what's going on.


    --
    Michael
    New York, NY USA
    Mcubed Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    Mcubed <myspamheremindspring.com> writes:
    >
    > If the RIAA has ever said that (and I can't recall it ever saying
    > that), then it's wrong. You don't buy a license when you buy a CD,
    > you buy a CD.
    They have said so. Unfortunately, their web site is broken at this
    time so I won't be able to dig up any quotes for you.
    >> On the other hand, the RIAA _also_ wants to prosecute people who
    >> download songs that they have arelady purchased on records and
    >> cassettes, and they don't provide any form of free/cheap media
    >> replacements if your record/tape/CD dies.
    >
    > What are your sources for these claims? When has the RIAA ever
    > indicated it wants to sue people who download songs at all? They
    > want to prosecute people who are sharing files.
    Again, based on statements from the RIAA's own web site. They
    consider downloading a copyright song illegal even if you already own
    that song on a legally purchased medium.

    Whether they will actually go ahead with such obviously frivolous
    lawsuits is something else, but they have repeatedly said that they
    consider all downloading illegal.
    >> As for the actual law, who knows? It doesn't really matter. The
    >> precedents set up by court cases have proven that the lawmakers
    >> have no power here. Whatever the RIAA can convince a court of is
    >> the law, and you have no rights, period.
    >
    > That's a mighty defeatist approach, as well as an entirely
    > inaccurate one. The precedents set by court cases have time and
    > time again carved out a roadmap for fair use principles of copyright
    > law.
    And how much will this get you if they decide to sue you? Will you
    spend your entire life's savings defending yourself against a
    frivolous lawsuit?

    Perhaps you'd like to read up on the Jesse Jordan case:
    [url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/22/146210[/url]

    This person did nothing illegal. He created an internal search
    engine to index his university's network. The RIAA sued him on the
    bogus claim that he was creating a piracy server. They got a
    preliminary ruling that forced him to give up his life's savings.
    After winning on appeal, Jesse has only recovered 83% of that
    confiscation. And now the RIAA is suing to get that back because he
    dared to talk to the press about it.

    You can talk all about rights and laws if you want, but when a group
    with an endless supply of high priced lawyers decides to start
    picking on college kids, the law really doesn't matter. Even if you
    win such a lawsuit, you still end up without any posessions - either
    the RIAA gets it or the lawyers get it.

    I don't know about you, but I think most people would consider "being
    right" to be a small consolation after losing everything to a
    frivolous suit.

    -- David
    David C. Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    Mcubed <myspamheremindspring.com> writes:
    >
    > If the RIAA has ever said that (and I can't recall it ever saying
    > that), then it's wrong. You don't buy a license when you buy a CD,
    > you buy a CD.
    They have said so. Unfortunately, their web site is broken at this
    time so I won't be able to dig up any quotes for you.
    >> On the other hand, the RIAA _also_ wants to prosecute people who
    >> download songs that they have arelady purchased on records and
    >> cassettes, and they don't provide any form of free/cheap media
    >> replacements if your record/tape/CD dies.
    >
    > What are your sources for these claims? When has the RIAA ever
    > indicated it wants to sue people who download songs at all? They
    > want to prosecute people who are sharing files.
    Again, based on statements from the RIAA's own web site. They
    consider downloading a copyright song illegal even if you already own
    that song on a legally purchased medium.

    Whether they will actually go ahead with such obviously frivolous
    lawsuits is something else, but they have repeatedly said that they
    consider all downloading illegal.
    >> As for the actual law, who knows? It doesn't really matter. The
    >> precedents set up by court cases have proven that the lawmakers
    >> have no power here. Whatever the RIAA can convince a court of is
    >> the law, and you have no rights, period.
    >
    > That's a mighty defeatist approach, as well as an entirely
    > inaccurate one. The precedents set by court cases have time and
    > time again carved out a roadmap for fair use principles of copyright
    > law.
    And how much will this get you if they decide to sue you? Will you
    spend your entire life's savings defending yourself against a
    frivolous lawsuit?

    Perhaps you'd like to read up on the Jesse Jordan case:
    [url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/22/146210[/url]

    This person did nothing illegal. He created an internal search
    engine to index his university's network. The RIAA sued him on the
    bogus claim that he was creating a piracy server. They got a
    preliminary ruling that forced him to give up his life's savings.
    After winning on appeal, Jesse has only recovered 83% of that
    confiscation. And now the RIAA is suing to get that back because he
    dared to talk to the press about it.

    You can talk all about rights and laws if you want, but when a group
    with an endless supply of high priced lawyers decides to start
    picking on college kids, the law really doesn't matter. Even if you
    win such a lawsuit, you still end up without any posessions - either
    the RIAA gets it or the lawyers get it.

    I don't know about you, but I think most people would consider "being
    right" to be a small consolation after losing everything to a
    frivolous suit.

    -- David
    David C. Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    [email]shaminotechie.com[/email] (David C.) writes:
    >
    > Perhaps you'd like to read up on the Jesse Jordan case:
    > [url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/22/146210[/url]
    >
    > This person did nothing illegal. He created an internal search
    > engine to index his university's network. The RIAA sued him on the
    > bogus claim that he was creating a piracy server. They got a
    > preliminary ruling that forced him to give up his life's savings.
    > After winning on appeal, Jesse has only recovered 83% of that
    > confiscation. And now the RIAA is suing to get that back because he
    > dared to talk to the press about it.
    Excuse me. I misread the article. It's much worse than this.

    They sued and convinced him to pay up $12,000 as a settlement in
    order to avoid a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. Donations from the
    public were able to give him back his life savings, but now the RIAA
    is saying that they intend to sue anyway, even though they signed a
    legally binding settlement on the matter.

    Anybody who thinks these people have any concept of obeying the law
    is insane. And anybody who thinks the law will help you if they
    decide to attack you on some trumped up charge is simply deluding
    himself.

    Again, Mr. Jordan did nothing illegal. He created a search engine
    for his college campus. Nothing more unusual than the one Google
    runs for the internet. But the RIAA decided to target him because
    he's just a kid without a legal department.

    -- David
    David C. Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    [email]shaminotechie.com[/email] (David C.) writes:
    >
    > Perhaps you'd like to read up on the Jesse Jordan case:
    > [url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/22/146210[/url]
    >
    > This person did nothing illegal. He created an internal search
    > engine to index his university's network. The RIAA sued him on the
    > bogus claim that he was creating a piracy server. They got a
    > preliminary ruling that forced him to give up his life's savings.
    > After winning on appeal, Jesse has only recovered 83% of that
    > confiscation. And now the RIAA is suing to get that back because he
    > dared to talk to the press about it.
    Excuse me. I misread the article. It's much worse than this.

    They sued and convinced him to pay up $12,000 as a settlement in
    order to avoid a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. Donations from the
    public were able to give him back his life savings, but now the RIAA
    is saying that they intend to sue anyway, even though they signed a
    legally binding settlement on the matter.

    Anybody who thinks these people have any concept of obeying the law
    is insane. And anybody who thinks the law will help you if they
    decide to attack you on some trumped up charge is simply deluding
    himself.

    Again, Mr. Jordan did nothing illegal. He created a search engine
    for his college campus. Nothing more unusual than the one Google
    runs for the internet. But the RIAA decided to target him because
    he's just a kid without a legal department.

    -- David
    David C. Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: iTunes for Windows users - legalizing your mp3 collection

    In <m2isqo4hha.fsfqqqq.invalid>, David C. wrote:
    > Mcubed <myspamheremindspring.com> writes:
    >>> On the other hand, the RIAA _also_ wants to prosecute people who
    >>> download songs that they have arelady purchased on records and
    >>> cassettes, and they don't provide any form of free/cheap media
    >>> replacements if your record/tape/CD dies.
    >>
    >> What are your sources for these claims? When has the RIAA ever
    >> indicated it wants to sue people who download songs at all? They
    >> want to prosecute people who are sharing files.
    >
    > Again, based on statements from the RIAA's own web site. They
    > consider downloading a copyright song illegal even if you already own
    > that song on a legally purchased medium.
    <http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/june03/copyright9a.html>, in particular
    the last question, covers this fairly clearly. They don't say "we will
    prosecute" but they *do* say that in their opinion it's illegal.

    --
    "I'm not sure if this is a good or a bad thing.
    Probably a bad thing; most things are bad things."
    -- Nile Evil
    Matt McLeod Guest

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. authenticating users using their windows login with cf 4and windows server 2000
    By hisaku in forum Coldfusion Server Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 16th, 09:22 PM
  2. FYI: Windows XP Users - Download SP2 Recommended
    By Brian Kvalheim - [MSFT MVP] in forum Web Design
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: August 10th, 06:31 PM
  3. removed all users from the windows folder
    By ThinIce in forum Windows Setup, Administration & Security
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 18th, 04:17 AM
  4. Connected users on windows xpworkgroup
    By John Cobb in forum Windows Networking
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 2nd, 04:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139