IDM Mailing Archive

1996-03-05 09:52rephlex>On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote: >> >> Of course, it is perfectly legal to make

From:: rephlex <rephlex@popmail.dircon.co.uk>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 09:52:13 GMT
Subject:: (idm) Re: idm V1 #411

quoted 7 lines On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote:

>On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote: >> >> Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US >> anyways, for non-commercial purposes. However you feel about ownership, >> those are the rules. I believe it also applies to mix CDs as well, were >> you to be in posession of a CDR. As long as it is not a commercial >> enterprise, I am within my legal rights to do this. That is the law.

erm, I'd like to see you make a mixtape of someone like Prince and freely distribute it on a wide scale and then say that to Warners. Have you ever read the small print around the edge of most records - IT MEANS WHAT IT SAYS. IT'S ALL A QUESTION OF PERMISSION.

1996-03-05 15:23Kent WilliamsOn Tue, 5 Mar 1996, rephlex wrote: > > IT'S ALL A QUESTION OF PERMISSION. > You know, I am

From:: Kent Williams <kent@inav.net>
To:: rephlex <rephlex@popmail.dircon.co.uk>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 09:23:20 -0600 (CST)
Subject:: Re: (idm) Re: idm V1 #411
Reply to:: (idm) Re: idm V1 #411

On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, rephlex wrote:

quoted 3 lines IT'S ALL A QUESTION OF PERMISSION.

> > IT'S ALL A QUESTION OF PERMISSION. >

You know, I am getting really sick of reading this shit. When Grant takes the time to read IDM and respond, I'd a whole lot rather hear about what's coming up from rephlex, what he thinks about various records etc, rather than respond to a pretty pathetic dilation on what started out as an innocent suggestion by someone who wasn't up on the idea of copyright protection. Is there actually a controversy here? Doesn't everyone, if they stop and think a second, really have a problem understanding what's legal and what's illegal? Mix tapes are in a legal grey area. It's obvious that they're a violation of copyright by any strict interpretation of the law. But they're illegal-but-tolerated. Any commercial mix (i.e. mixmag Hawtin disk) are produced under license. We're on a continuum here: Legal Legal-but-pushing-it Illegal-but-tolerated Illegal-but-discouraged Illegal-with-zero-Tolerance Illegal-and-Interpol-is-after-you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- In an expanding universe, time is on the side of the outcast. Those who once inhabited the suburbs of human contempt find that without changing their address they eventually live in the metropolis. -- Quentin Crisp Kent Williams kent@inav.net (319) 338 6053 (home) (319) 626 6700 x 219 (work) (319) 626 3489 (fax)

1996-03-05 10:26'Nick....'> >On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote: > >> > >> Of course, it is perfectly legal t

From:: 'Nick....' <ndavey@essex.ac.uk>
To:: rephlex <rephlex%popmail.dircon.co.uk@uk.ac.essex.seralph6>
Cc:: <idm%hyperreal.com@uk.ac.essex.seralph6>
Date:: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 10:26:38 GMT
Subject:: Re: (idm) Re: idm V1 #411

quoted 3 lines On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote:

> >On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote: > >> > >> Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for

people, in the US anyways, for non-commercial purposes. However you feel about ownership, those are the rules. I believe it also applies to mix CDs as well, were you to be in posession of a CDR. As long as it is not a commercial enterprise, I am within my legal rights to do this. That is the law.

quoted 2 lines erm, I'd like to see you make a mixtape of someone like

> > erm, I'd like to see you make a mixtape of someone like

Prince and freely distribute it on a wide scale and then say that to Warners. Have you ever read the small print around the edge of most records - IT MEANS WHAT IT SAYS. IT'S ALL A QUESTION OF PERMISSION.

quoted 1 line

Yep, i've got to agree on this point. However, if you abided by all the regulations put on the outside of records, you probably could get sued for playing a record to more than one person at a time. The way i look at it, you've bought the record, so you have a right to play it. However if you infringe the copyright, ie make money for making any copies of a track, then this is where the Grey area applies. Legally any copies made of a record whether For profit or not it's illegal. If you arn't making any money from it, and you're not causing extensive loss in profits for a company no one will care. If you start pissing around with large companies you'll get burned. Small labels can't afford the time/money/hassle to inforce any form of copyright, lots of labels are started/owned by DJs, so they don't care.

Re: (idm) Re: idm V1 #411