IDM Mailing Archive

got this from the orb list...

quoted 28 lines I just spent the better part of two days checking this stuff out

> >> I just spent the better part of two days checking this stuff out > and it > >appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on > >legislation which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send > someone a > >tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in just as much > > >trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg CD's. Max > penalties > >include jail time and fines of up to US $250,000. > >> Apparently, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is > > quite > >> serious about this. They have already gone after a Bruce > Springsteen > >trader - apparently, the guy had his trade list out on the 'net and > an > >RIAA mole responded, pretending to be interested in trading. They > worked > >out a deal and when the mole received the bootleg tapes, the RIAA > made > >their move. According to reports, the RIAA revoked his Internet > access. > >No word on whether or not they are actively pursuing criminal charges > > >against him. (More info on this is available at this Springsteen boot > > >site: http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/set/7783/updates.html)

cl

On 5 Jan 98, cl wrote: (idm) bootlegs, tapes:

quoted 6 lines appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on

> appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on > legislation which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send > someone a tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in > just as much trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg > CD's. Max penalties include jail time and fines of up to US > $250,000.

Forgive the bandwidth used up in repeating this chunk of message - but I'm just so mortified and busy trying to pick up my jaw which has dropped ... this is MAD BAD and AWFUL news. I'll go to jail if I must - - - damn damn damn. I * "Incomplete without surface noise" - Autechre

"Irene McC" <substar @ iafrica.com> wrote:

quoted 1 line

>>>

On 5 Jan 98, cl wrote: (idm) bootlegs, tapes:

quoted 6 lines appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on

> appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on > legislation which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send > someone a tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in > just as much trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg > CD's. Max penalties include jail time and fines of up to US > $250,000.

Forgive the bandwidth used up in repeating this chunk of message - but I'm just so mortified and busy trying to pick up my jaw which has dropped ... this is MAD BAD and AWFUL news. I'll go to jail if I must - - - damn damn damn. <<< calm down irene, don't let this ruin your day. clinton, slippery tho' he is, can't touch you in africa. i can't imagine extradition proceedings over a dodgy c90. don't most other countries have something similar anyhow? is the bpi's (?) "home taping is killing music" campaign in the uk backed up w/ copyright laws that carry penalties? there may even be some local south african legislation already in place you've already broken. i think the solution is say nothing and don't put up a website advertising your misdeeds :-) -martin

On 06-Jan-98, Martin_Burbridge@3com.com wrote:

quoted 2 lines appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on

>> appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on >> legislation which makes it a crime to trade tapes.

quoted 5 lines calm down irene, don't let this ruin your day. clinton, slippery tho' he

>calm down irene, don't let this ruin your day. clinton, slippery tho' he >is, can't touch you in africa. i can't imagine extradition proceedings over >a dodgy c90. don't most other countries have something similar anyhow? is >the bpi's (?) "home taping is killing music" campaign in the uk backed up >w/ copyright laws that carry penalties?

As far as I'm aware, blank tapes have a "tax" added into their retail price which allows for the duplication of originals, but this might be a myth. Anyway, such a law could never be properly enforced!? -- <---HEATsink---? np: music, sweet music: guy called gerald

quoted 5 lines About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on legislation

>>>About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on legislation >>>which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send someone >>>a tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in >>>just as much trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg >>>CD's.

quoted 2 lines ... this is MAD BAD and AWFUL news.

>>... this is MAD BAD and AWFUL news. >>I'll go to jail if I must - - - damn damn damn.

quoted 4 lines clinton, slippery tho' he is, can't touch you in africa.

>clinton, slippery tho' he is, can't touch you in africa. >don't most other countries have something similar anyhow? is >the bpi's (?) "home taping is killing music" campaign in the uk backed up >w/ copyright laws that carry penalties?

This *is* part speculation but I don't believe anyone within the music scene would themselves support the prosecution of someone with no other charges against them except the minor league trading of tapes with acquaintances - pretty much regardless of which countries the protagonists come from. It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for example it is still illegal to participate in consensual anal sex between a husband and wife; lending a recording to a friend for them to tape contravenes licencing conditions; keeping a copy of a transmitted tv program on videotape for longer than around a month is also theoretically illegal. There are many, many, other examples all of which you are exceptionally unlikely to be prosecuted for if it is your only 'offence'. Music piracy is entirely different on a much larger scale, accounting for 14% of worldwide CD sales in 1996 and perhaps more since. Again speculation but I don't reckon that any of these were cd's from Asphodel, Skam, Mille Plateaux, Leaf, or even the bigger labels of idm such as Ninja Tune, Warp, Reinforced, etc etc... Barring the most occasional home burnt cd I don't think they'll start feeling the effects of bootleggers until they have a much bigger worldwide audience (and it is at this point that a company becomes aware of concepts such as wastage/shrinkage and, I would imagine, budgets for such as well). If you are involved in some form of music trade as a business and profit oriented scheme without legal permission to do so then I'm sure a technical illegality, such as a tape-for-tape trade or the like, would be taken in to account if necessary BUT if this trade is on a person to person basis with no motive for profit beyond exposing yourself to the sounds of another's music collection then it is likely prosecution would be only the remotest possibility. As for myself, I can forward the familiar to all example of trading tapes with a friend whose tastes are very different to my own (a bit more house & light-jazz jungle oriented). We have both bought many of the records we have heard on each other's tapes - records we probably would not have heard, nor purchased, otherwise. Oh, and as an afterthought: In the UK though the music industry is earning more than ever before (1.2 billion uk pounds during 1996 and increasing). Rubyjune. ---- <http://www.rjune.demon.co.uk/>

At 12:57 AM 1/7/98 +0000, Iain H. wrote:

quoted 5 lines About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on legislation

>>>>About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on legislation >>>>which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send someone >>>>a tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in >>>>just as much trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg >>>>CD's.

Just a bit about the context of and clarity to this legislation. It was done to "close a loophole" in copyright which stated that so long as redistribution was done without an intent to profit, there was a limit to how much the copyright "thief" was liable for. This "loophole" was used by the defense in the David LaMacchia case, where a student (David) at MIT was distributing warez from his dorm PC, and since he wasn't profiting from it, the copyright holders couldn't sue for "lost income", and so this legislation was proposed and sailed through Congress. Now that this is in place, the Stormtroopers of Death I mean the Software Publisher's Association can fine the full retail value of the perceived loss. This situation was pre-empted by an event on the Internet, so you can bet the copyright hounds will be looking to enforce it online and elsewhere, including music. But as in the real world, they'll go after the big violators; so I wouldn't worry about giving a tape to a friend, or putting a few sound samples online. I'd be more worried if I ran a big mp3 archive of songs in the Top 40. There was something on MTV News the other day about the new Pearl Jam album being distributed on the Internet by fans with advance copies, even though the whole album won't be out for a few months. And in high-quality mpeg! Hmm, maybe it's time to check out off-shore web hosting again... Brian --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- "Optimism is a strategy for making brian@apache.org a better future." - Noam Chomsky brian@hyperreal.org

On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Iain H. wrote:

quoted 13 lines This *is* part speculation but I don't believe anyone within the music

> This *is* part speculation but I don't believe anyone within the music > scene would themselves support the prosecution of someone with no other > charges against them except the minor league trading of tapes with > acquaintances - pretty much regardless of which countries the protagonists > come from. > > It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for > example it is still illegal to participate in consensual anal sex between a > husband and wife; lending a recording to a friend for them to tape > contravenes licencing conditions; keeping a copy of a transmitted tv > program on videotape for longer than around a month is also theoretically > illegal. There are many, many, other examples all of which you are > exceptionally unlikely to be prosecuted for if it is your only 'offence'.

I agree. heh anal sex is illegal in Maryland also (other states too?). I would say by far the best example of this would be that it is actually indeed illegal for 2 people to live under the same estate without a marriage license.. learned it in civics class (well it was do-the-homework-for-the-wannabe-lawyer class, but still). look how many ppl live together and have babies without being married and everyone knows. I too think this is proposterous and most likely won't be enforced.

quoted 1 line

>

-- __ __\ \ Game Program ( R G / /_\ \ .gampggrmx.1x26s..1<,www.freq-div.home.ml.org<,, \_____/ >> buh@clark.net >> < > .. >> .<>> >> >

On 6 Jan 98, Martin_Burbridge@3com.com wrote

quoted 1 line "home taping is killing music" campaign in the uk

> "home taping is killing music" campaign in the uk

At this point I just HAVE to quote the counter-slogan (one which I *love* :-) ) Home Taping Is Skill In Music Flying Saucer Attack, on the spine of their CD "Further" have the following text running down it : "Home Taping Is Reinventing Music" (although I think this applies to their habit of lo-fi recordings in the bedroom ! ) And Ninja Tune (God bless 'em !) on the back of Journeyman have a little DAT tape and crossbones logo reading "Tone Taping Is Thrilling Music" (and in teeny letters beneath this it says "and it's not illegal ..... YET ! ) ~~~ ahem ;-) <><><><><> Yeah, I know ... my husband runs a recording studio and for the eleven years he's known me, he has not smiled upon my taping habit. There ya go ... I * "Incomplete without surface noise" - Autechre

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: (idm) bootlegs, tapes Author: "Irene McC" <substar@iafrica.com> at AWT_INTERNET_PO Date: 1/6/98 9:21 PM On 5 Jan 98, cl wrote: (idm) bootlegs, tapes:

quoted 6 lines appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on

> appears to be legit. About two weeks ago, Clinton signed off on > legislation which makes it a crime to trade tapes. If you send > someone a tape and get something in exchange for it, you're now in > just as much trouble, legally, as you would for selling bootleg > CD's. Max penalties include jail time and fines of up to US > $250,000.

Forgive the bandwidth used up in repeating this chunk of message -please forgive again...but does anyone actually believe that they will be fined for trading tapes? Cum on people, as fucked up as US law is, it still is not THAT fucked up. I'll go to jail if I must - - - damn damn damn. Yes, the over-crowded prisons are now bursting thanks to increased efforts to stop tape trading. Shit, I'd go to jail for that too!!!! Fight the power sister Irene. I * "Incomplete without surface noise" - Autechre

quoted 7 lines It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for

> It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for > example it is still illegal to participate in consensual anal sex between a > husband and wife; lending a recording to a friend for them to tape > contravenes licencing conditions; keeping a copy of a transmitted tv > program on videotape for longer than around a month is also theoretically > illegal. There are many, many, other examples all of which you are > exceptionally unlikely to be prosecuted for if it is your only 'offence'.

The difference being, Iain, that nobody is being hired by the RIAA to troll web sites, FTP sites, mailing lists, and mailing list archives for evidence of any of those activities so they can compile a report of estimated damages and report you to the authorities to initiate prosecution. If you think the people who shoved this legislation through Congress are going to hesitate to make very public examples of people they catch violating this law you are being naive. -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo) ::: Internet Music Wantlists: http://www.swcp.com/lazlo/Wantlists

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: (idm) bootlegs, tapes Author: "Lazlo Nibble" <lazlo@swcp.com> at AWT_INTERNET_PO Date: 1/7/98 12:13 PM

quoted 7 lines It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for

> It is illegal to participate in many different activities - in Britain for > example it is still illegal to participate in consensual anal sex between a > husband and wife; lending a recording to a friend for them to tape > contravenes licencing conditions; keeping a copy of a transmitted tv > program on videotape for longer than around a month is also theoretically > illegal. There are many, many, other examples all of which you are > exceptionally unlikely to be prosecuted for if it is your only 'offence'.

The difference being, Iain, that nobody is being hired by the RIAA to troll web sites, FTP sites, mailing lists, and mailing list archives for evidence of any of those activities so they can compile a report of estimated damages and report you to the authorities to initiate prosecution. If you think the people who shoved this legislation through Congress are going to hesitate to make very public examples of people they catch violating this law you are being naive. Naive? this is ridiculous. There is not a single judge who would keep something like this in his/her court for a second. There are thousands of laws which are never enforced, because they are pointless, and should be removed from the books. Alot of states are doing just this right now. That ANYONE should worry about this is utter nonsense.

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Re[2]: (idm) bootlegs, tapes Author: "Lazlo Nibble" <lazlo@swcp.com> at AWT_INTERNET_PO Date: 1/7/98 12:41 PM

quoted 6 lines If you think the people who shoved this legislation through Congress are

>> If you think the people who shoved this legislation through Congress are >> going to hesitate to make very public examples of people they catch >> violating this law you are being naive. > > Naive? this is ridiculous. There is not a single judge who would keep > something like this in his/her court for a second.

Here on Earth there are plenty of judges who would be quite content to hear a case in their court that involved the violation of Federal law. i'm not a lawyer, but i do work very closely with many, and i have met a few judges in my time :) and from this experience your argument is BULLSHIT. It's not always so black & white. What do Federal judges do for a living on *your* planet -- pick strawberries? fine, go on with *your* paranoid world. no matter to me. chow. -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo) ::: Internet Music Wantlists: http://www.swcp.com/lazlo/Wantlists

Colin, your responses would be a LOT more readable if you separately them properly from the message you're quoting, like others do with a '>'. Brian "Home Fucking is Killing Prostitution" --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- "Optimism is a strategy for making brian@apache.org a better future." - Noam Chomsky brian@hyperreal.org

On 07-Jan-98, Brian Behlendorf wrote:

quoted 1 line Brian "Home Fucking is Killing Prostitution"

>Brian "Home Fucking is Killing Prostitution"

Wicked :-) -- <---HEATsink---? NP: er, DJ "Do One"

instead of ranting and raving, why doesnt someone post what was exactly passed by congress and signed by the prez, so we can all agree on what were talking about...i mean, the initail post came from the orb list for christsakes... tom w np: muslimgauze - sandtraffiker