Going CD-less to fund amp upgrade?

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

quote:

Originally posted by themrock:
Because now everything is lossless, I saw no sense in keeping my cds, I sold all my cds and bought me from the money a Supercap .

Was theft ever so easily swallowed?

Dear Adam,
before telling me a thief and writing such abusive stuff about me, inform yourself about the copyright.I did it for myself, before selling the cds and asked a friend of mine, who is a lawyer specialized in media-law.
It is allowed to make private copies from cds you owned and you can keep them, even if you sell the cds.
I am waiting for an apology from you.

Everything isn't lossless.

iTunes, amazon etc are all compressed mp3s. If you want lossless, for the majority of music, you pretty much have to buy the CD, rip it and then I guess sell it. Or otherwise, ahem.

It is my opinion that sorting out copyright will be one of the major challenges of the first half of the 21st century.

In the second half of the 20th century it has completely lost the noble and transparent character it was devised with mid/late 19th century.
Also it differs across regions, is non-intuitive, protects a 20th century big business model at the cost of society and - still IMO- is handicapping progress. As that is not solved easily the least we could do is try not to talk about it in black and white right away.

There have been excesses on both sides of the debate - on the hand the RIAA suing a mother with her toddler dancing to Prince on a YouTube clip, on the other hand mass piracy in several known developing countries/zones.
I don't count P2P filesharing to be an excess but rather a mass tendency in society however positive or negative that may be. All in all, the Naim Forum is not the ususal P2P University hacking club anyway.
What do to / what can you do with CDs you've once bought was the original question and one that merits a decent discussion.

That said I can totally understand that Naim - now producing gear capable of copying/distributing copyrighted stuff - wants to underline it is a "decent business" (which we all knew anyway). Surely they don't want to get into trouble and either face lawsuits which could threathen the company or face being excluded from content or technology agreements. I just want to caution that things are not so black and white here and copyright laws are not very clear and concistent, so it's imperative to always double-check.

Sorry for the long post, rgds, daddycool

quote:

Originally posted by matt303:
I believe that the current Rega CD players work in a similar fashion.

They have a 32Mb buffer that they fill up first. So it takes a few seconds before the CD actually starts playing.

quote:

Originally posted by daddycool:
It is my opinion that sorting out copyright will be one of the major challenges of the first half of the 21st century.

I am aware of the wider problems with extended copyright.

As a start 'Thinking Allowed' (Radio 4 Listen Again) has a brief discussion which could be extended by reading the book discussed.

"INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
Is copyright killing creativity? James Boyle is William Neal Reynolds Professor of Law at Duke Law School, North Carolina and the author of a new book The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind explaining the uneasy relationship between culture, copyright laws and creativity."

Dear Adam,
i am still waiting for an apology, calling me a thief.

Matt,

I have just ordered an AppleTV to play media server for my digital media and I am already thinking that a Beresford/CA Dacmagic with digital optical connections to the AppleTV and my DVD player would enable me to sell my CD3.5 without removing the ability to spin CDs.

Adam/Themrock,

Regarding copyright I believe that selling on CDs after ripping on a server would be safest if you retained proof of purchase.

Jono

quote:

Regarding copyright I believe that selling on CDs after ripping on a server would be safest if you retained proof of purchase

For German Copyright, if you once have owned the cd, you can take copies for your own and then can keep the copies, even if you sell the cds.
Also you can give a copy to a friend.
There are restrictions, it isnt allowed to make profit and to hack a security mechanism.
And important for computer software it isnt allowed.
As told, a friend of mine is a lawyer in "media rights" and i asked him before selling the cds.
And thats the reason, why i am so upset that Adams calls me a thief.

quote:

Originally posted by themrock:
Dear Adam,
I am still waiting for an apology, calling me a thief.

I was very busy this morning and, feeling that my reply deserved proper consideration, put it off until now.

I unreservedly apologise to you if the implication of my post was that I believed you to have infringed local copyright laws by your actions. I am not an expert on worldwide copyright laws and, if you have exactly explained your actions to a lawyer qualified in copyright matters - then you are correct in requiring, and receiving, an apology for that. It would appear that you have broken no local law.

Just to clarify (as the foregoing may appear over-qualified) I apologise unreservedly for giving you (and others) the impression that I was accusing you of breaking a law.

What I did say was "theft" and I hope it will not seem to be splitting hairs if I repeat that I do consider this to be theft - legally permitted or not.

Copyright laws are an awful mess and it is often difficult to their consistent ethical backbone. That said - I believe that one buys the fair use of a copyrighted product through its purchase. Making a copy and then passing on the original I consider to be having your cake and selling it. It diminishes the reasonably expected return that an artist is due for his/her creation. It is, in my personal moral judgement, theft.

I believe many/most of us are guilty of this - to varying degrees. I just think we should confront the likely eventual consequences of our actions and admit that we are conveniently ignoring them.

Dear Adam,
i accept your apology.
I know its a very complicated theme, therefore i asked my friend.
have a nice day.
And back to the Naim-Stuff.
Ingo

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

It diminishes the reasonably expected return that an artist is due for his/her creation. It is, in my personal moral judgement, theft.

I believe many/most of us are guilty of this - to varying degrees. I just think we should confront the likely eventual consequences of our actions and admit that we are conveniently ignoring them.

If you mean the denial of revenue direct to an artist/record company as they do not benefit from this sale then I would agree that this is a difficult issue. If you were to send the artist a portion of the sale then morally it would be less offensive. The problem is the record company in this model. They want the money as badly, if not more than, the artist.

If you have a look at this interview with Trent Reznor it makes interesting reading, particularly this bit his take on sharing music with his fan-base.

Jono

Sorry for my poor English at the end of my last post.

Jono

quote:

Originally posted by Jono 13:
The problem is the record company in this model. They want the money as badly, if not more than, the artist.

I agree that the record companies have often not covered themselves in glory. However, the bad behaviour of some or all of your victims does not change the morality of your own actions.

The answer would lie in changing the system or proposing an alternative. Just circumventing the due channels without alternative provision for people's (un)fair labours isn't going to support an industry/artist for long.

I agree that we need a model to reward the artist, and their management/record company of choice, if only to ensure that A & R development continues.

I do not agree that large scale payment avoidance bit-torrent sites should be allowed to operate without the consent of the copyright holder. Trent Reznor's model, and along with Radiohead, works for the established artist. My concern lies with new talent trying to make it. Without support from recorded music sales their lifes will be un-sustainable and, thus, deny us of future music.

Jono

P.S. I do NOT use bit-torrent sites and I keep my CDs as I know how fragile computer systems are.

Larry Lessig has a great deal to say on the subject of copyright.

He is a brilliant presenter with a unique style and also extremely thought provoking. Google: Larry Lessig how creativity is being strangled by the law. You won't regret it

I also read a paper some time ago by an economist (forget the source and name) that compared digital media and distribution to lighthouses. The argument being that when you cannot constrain the distribution of an asset how do you fund that asset or receive compensation for use of that asset?

His answer, unfortunately, was that the only way these things can be funded is through a system of taxation with monies being distributed to artists based on number of plays. I didn't agree with his conclusion but it seems suspiciously close to a subscription model.

quote:

Originally posted by Harry H. Wombat:
the only way these things can be funded is through a system of taxation with monies being distributed to artists based on number of plays.

I have a representative of the RIAA here - taking notes even as I play "Skank in Bed" for the 14th time today.

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

I have a representative of the RIAA here - taking notes even as I play "Skank in Bed" for the 14th time today.

Good evening Representative of the RIAA. A monkey and an infinite number of his friends just stole my keyboard. Clearly any mention of taxation was just a random result of the application of an infinite number of tiny, little hirsute fingers and clearly should not be taken seriously.

I have disciplined a few of the monkeys and they have assured me that this will not happen again.

Foobar George.... Foobar is the answer to all your ills.

It will save you the $1000 on a new Mac.

many artists now have DIRECT paypal accounts where they receive ALL of the funds (less payapl fees) you want to give them.

Perhaps for an illegally obtained file, a free download of an album (Radiohead), or for whatever reason.