Jump to content
IGNORED

Getting rid of CD's?


Recommended Posts

On 05/08/2017 at 6:24 PM, astrotoy said:

BTW, the author of a book or the artist/composer on a CD may not be the owner of the copyright.  They may have sold the rights to someone else, and they don't have the right to sell or give away copies of the book or CD without the permission of the copyright owner.

As you say copyright and ownership of copyright is a very complicated situation.  And even if an artist owns the copyright they may not have rights to distribution - often distribution rights are sold for a certain period to a record label and its then up to them to decide what to produce / sell.

 

I’m sure it’s not the only case, but I know of one artist who was (in the late 90s: having been “famous” in the late 80s - early 90s) “bootlegging” their own recordings because their record label wasn’t selling their music but they couldn’t legally goto another distributor.

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Audio_ELF said:

As you say copyright and ownership of copyright is a very complicated situation.  And even if an artist owns the copyright they may not have rights to distribution - often distribution rights are sold for a certain period to a record label and its then up to them to decide what to produce / sell.

 

I’m sure it’s not the only case, but I know of one artist who was (in the late 90s: having been “famous” in the late 80s - early 90s) “bootlegging” their own recordings because their record label wasn’t selling their music but they couldn’t legally goto another distributor.

Well, it depends on whether the recording artiste has signed over the rights to the record label (very common in the industry as part of their recording contracts). The record labels some times have used this to censure recording artistes who disagree with the "artistic direction" that the record label wants of them.

 

While many would agree that many of the recording contracts are rather draconian, it is up to the recording artiste whether the artiste wants to sign it (there is no gun held to their temples). Perhaps distribution of music used to be much more difficult in the past, but things have become more accessible nowadays. SoundCloud, PledgeMusic and BandCamp are examples of different channels that can be used in place of traditional recording contracts with the traditional music labels.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment

Careful... :)

 

You can make a backup copy in the US and listen to it, except when  you perhaps can’t.  For example, making a personal backup copy of an SACD....

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/31/2017 at 6:00 AM, Kal Rubinson said:
On 7/31/2017 at 1:25 AM, Teresa said:

I buy used DVDs for $1 to $2 each and Blu-rays for $3 to $5 at local pawn shops and thrift stores. 

On 7/31/2017 at 1:01 AM, Teresa said:

Yes the artists only get paid for the new sale and that is why one is supposed to delete all copies of any disc they sell or give away, as the rights to listen to the music pass to the new owner.

 

So, you are OK with this?

 

On 7/31/2017 at 8:45 AM, joelha said:

Kal,

 

You're asking whether Teresa would be o.k. with deleting copies of discs before selling those discs?

 

If that's your question, why wouldn't she be o.k. with this? It seems like the right thing to do.

 

Joel

 

Kal,

 

Joe is correct for the reason I'm OK with this.

 

One is supposed to delete all copies of a physical disc when they give away, sell or trade it in because the right to play the music from the disc travels with the disc. The royalties were paid once when the disc was new, the seller gives up all rights to listen to the music or play the movie as that right passes to the new owner who purchased the used disc.

 

It is not up to the buyer to make sure the seller deletes their copies. However, if a seller volunteers that they copied the discs and they are keeping the copies I will not buy from them. The only legal reason to give away, sell or trade any music or movie disc is because one doesn't like it. If they keep any copies they made, it is both illegal and immoral IMHO.

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment
On 8/1/2017 at 3:43 PM, kumakuma said:

 

I think most of us here on CA are listening to a copy of the original CD, rather than the actual polycarbonate disc.

 

Most yes, but not all. I prefer the sound of my CDs and even my Reference Recordings 24/176.4 HRx data discs on my Yamaha Blu-ray/SACD player using its internal DAC to the .wav music files I ripped of them played on my Mac Mini though my Teac DSD DAC. And my Teac DAC cost me three times as much as my Yamaha Blu-ray/SACD player, go figure. Some may say I need a better USB cable (I use a cheap Dynex), however since only 10% of my music is on my computer, it's not cost effective to spend more on a USB cable. 90% of my music is on SACDs, Blu-rays, 24/176.4 HRxs, 24/96 DVDs, HDCDs and CDs.

 

On 8/3/2017 at 1:19 PM, DancingSea said:

 

While you may be technically correct, in practice, this feels overly strict to me.  If I'm at a garage sale and someone has a box of CD's for sale, I'm not going ask them if they deleted their digital copy and call the FBI if they haven't :) 

 

On 8/3/2017 at 1:31 PM, Speed Racer said:

 

That is not your responsibility. When you buy the CDs, you get the right to listen to those CDs and make backups. The person that sold them gave up those rights and, by law, should delete all backup copies they may have.

 

DancingSea,

 

Speed Racer is correct. It's not your position to ask if they deleted their digital copies, that is their responsibility. However if they tell me they are keeping the copies they made I will not buy from them. 

 

On 8/7/2017 at 1:20 AM, Jud said:

Careful... :)

 

You can make a backup copy in the US and listen to it, except when  you perhaps can’t.  For example, making a personal backup copy of an SACD....

 

Jud, 

 

SACD, DVD and Blu-ray all have copy protection and it is currently illegal to defeat copy protection even for personal use. Some DVDs and Blu-ray discs include a digital copy disc or a download code for UltraViolet or iTunes, this is the only legal way to have a copy of a DVD or Blu-ray disc. However, if one gives away, sells or trades in the disc they must also delete the copy as it would now be an illegal copy.

 

I understand with SACD people want to play the disc through a DSD DAC for better sound quality, however officially that is an illegal copy. The only legal way I know of to play an SACD through an eternal DAC is with one of the newer DACs that have an HDMI input.

I have dementia. I save all my posts in a text file I call Forums.  I do a search in that file to find out what I said or did in the past.

 

I still love music.

 

Teresa

Link to comment
On 7/29/2017 at 11:23 PM, sdolezalek said:

Simple question: If you destroy or give away the CD's, how could you ever prove that you have a valid license to the digital copies you kept of those CD's?  Even if you kept all your receipts for the purchases, how could you prove that you didn't sell the CD's?

 

Simple question: who is asking for valid licenses for his music? Can you provide me some names or organizations who are planning on raiding his computer and his home, demanding to see proof before he's allowed to listen? 

 

OP, do whatever you want to do. If you want to keep them, go for it. If you want to get rid of them, go for it. No one in the real world cares [or knows], and no one in the real world has any authority to do anything even if they did [they don't]. 

Link to comment
On 8/3/2017 at 6:01 AM, Jud said:

 

Quite clear in the UK.  Different countries have different laws. 

 

Which country has the most "ethical" laws? Which country is the most "right" and which country is the most "wrong" on this topic? Anyone? 

 

On a side note, should buying used CDs be illegal? I've seen it claimed amongst music fans that the used market shouldn't exist because it's morally/ethically/financially wrong. Garth Brooks fought against the used market as well. Should one refrain from buying CDs as it enables possible illegal/unethical behavior [by the previous owners]?  

 

How far down this rabbit hole can we go? 

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, stuck_limo said:

Which country has the most "ethical" laws? Which country is the most "right" and which country is the most "wrong" on this topic? Anyone?

I don't think we are debating which country has the "best" set of laws, judged by whatever standards, but to mention that the rule of law applies in whatever jurisdiction you choose to live in.

 

If you choose to break the law, you stand the chance of being charged under the legal system. Yes, you may find some laws in your country to be unjust, or even without logical foundation. It is then up to you to either "live with it" and shut up (rather than complain about it and do absolute nothing about changing things), or to campaign for change.

 

If one is so bothered about the laws about copyright in the jurisdiction of your residence, then do something about it! Lobby the people who can change the statutes and regulations.

 

*I must say that campaigning for said change may involve multiple lawsuits in the process.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment

I don't understand people who talk about the law as if it were the restaurant, and pick and choose what they want to obey like picking items off an ala carte menu. I am sorry, but the law is a fixed course menu - take it, or leave it. Yes, you may discuss your dietary preferences/restrictions with the restaurant, but it is totally up to the restaurant whether they want to accommodate those requests. The same can be said about the law, where you can lobby the judiciary to change laws and statutes, or even repeal some. However, do not think that you are free from prosecution under the eyes of the law, just because you do not agree with a particular law or statute.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, foodfiend said:

I don't understand people who talk about the law as if it were the restaurant, and pick and choose what they want to obey like picking items off an ala carte menu.

 

I think we all to this every day. Ever drive 1 mph over the speed limit? Then you pick and choose which laws to obey. 

 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I think we all to this every day. Ever drive 1 mph over the speed limit? Then you pick and choose which laws to obey. 

 

I don't drive :P , but I get what you are saying. However, I know that I am breaking the law in whatever fashion, and if I get caught by the authorities, will face whatever the legal system dictates. That is the rule of law. If I break it, I must be prepared to face the consequences.

 

It is different from those who break the law, then complain that it is not fair once they get caught for the offense. I call them the free-riders, leeching off the system at the collective expense of everyone else. Worse are others who encourage others to do it, without pointing out any potential legal ramifications!

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment

Let's look at it this way, if everyone believes that it is perfectly alright to rip the music off the CD, and then sell off said CD while retaining the rips, then the recording artiste, who depends on CD sales for income, could potentially only benefit from the sale of a single CD (the first owner buys the disc, rips and sells, and you repeat the process ad infinitum). Extreme example, I know. In this case, how much different is it, from someone who buys a CD, rips it, and puts it on a public torrent site? All those people are guilty of denying the artiste income, while enjoying the creative work.

 

Is this not what the copyright laws are trying to protect? Would the recording artiste be able to survive based on this income (of sales of a single CD)? Obviously not. Which may lead the artiste to move away from recording music, or leaving the industry altogether.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm with you. If I get caught, I'm willing to take the punishment. If I think the law should be changed, I follow the correct procedure. 

 

And thus the OP ought to follow your advice.  They need to decide for themselves if selling off old, used CD's without erasing the rips is a legal risk they are willing to take.  The odds of any legal trouble coming from it are astronomically low.  So low that the legal side of it really doesn't pertain.  Which boils it down to a moral question.

 

And the moral side of the equation is far more personal than law.  With morality, there is nothing cast in stone, no tablets to refer to, nothing in actual writing that must be adhered to.  Taking this CD situation, its up to each of us to decide if its morally right to sell used CD's and not delete the rips.

 

For me, morally, its perfectly ok under the scenario presented by the OP.  And of course, the CD rip Taliban are perfectly free to follow a more fundamentalist approach!

 

In context of the OP, the law will never take any action.  Never.  So law, in this specific situation, is a red herring.

 

To continue the speeding metaphor.  Its like there being a stretch of road where, by topography, its physically impossible to create a speed trap.  The road is very straight, with no other cars for miles and miles.  If you speed, yes, its against the law.  But its impossible to get caught.  What would you do?

 

The OP's scenario is like that.  The law becomes irrelevant due to inability to enforce.  Its all about one's personal morality and sense of safety.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, DancingSea said:

And the moral side of the equation is far more personal than law.  With morality, there is nothing cast in stone, no tablets to refer to, nothing in actual writing that must be adhered to.  Taking this CD situation, its up to each of us to decide if its morally right to sell used CD's and not delete the rips.The OP's scenario is like that.  The law becomes irrelevant due to inability to enforce.  Its all about one's personal morality and sense of safety.

 

This is moral relativism and clearly should be rejected.  However, this is not the place for such arguments.

mQa is dead!

Link to comment

IMHO, one should be forthright about all the possible legal ramifications of any practice when offering advice for others to follow. I this case, I am fine if one were to point out that it is technically against the law, but very unlikely for any prosecution to occur. I would leave the morality out of the picture, and let the OP (or any such person) decide on which path to follow. After all, they are the ones who will bear any consequences, if they are found on the wrong side of the law (not the one offering the advice).

 

Using the driving example, you can tell a driver that the road is straight and impossible for the authorities to erect a speed trap in that stretch of the road. However, you should mention the speed limit and the consequence of being caught. So that if the driver decides to speed on the stretch, he knows exactly what he is getting himself into. He will have no one to blame but himself if he is unlucky to find a patrol car who happened to be there with a mobile speed trap.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions...

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...