Sony BMG's chief anti-piracy lawyer: "Copying" music you own is "stealing"

[radio667]

from arstechnica.com ........... Duluth, Minnesota — Testimony today in Capitol Records, et al v. Jammie Thomas quickly and inadvertently turned to the topic of fair use when Jennifer Pariser, the head of litigation for Sony BMG, was called to the stand to testify. Pariser said that file-sharing is extremely damaging to the music industry and that record labels are particularly affected. In doing so, she advocated a view of copyright that would turn many honest people into thieves.

Pariser noted that music labels make no money on touring, radio, or merchandise, which leaves the company particularly exposed to the negative effects of file-sharing. "It's my personal belief that Sony BMG is half the size now as it was in 2000," she said, thanks to piracy. In Pariser's view, "when people steal, when they take music without compensation, we are harmed."

Pariser has a very broad definition of "stealing." When questioned by Richard Gabriel, lead counsel for the record labels, Pariser suggested that what millions of music fans do is actually theft. The dirty deed? Ripping your own CDs or downloading songs you already own.

Gabriel asked if it was wrong for consumers to make copies of music which they have purchased, even just one copy. Pariser replied, "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said.

Countless studies have shown that the majority of music on portable music players like the iPod comes from sources other than download services. For most people, that music is comprised primarily of songs "ripped" from CD collections to MP3 or some other comparable format. Indeed, most portable music players comes with software (like iTunes) which is designed to facilitate the easy ripping of CDs. According to Pariser's view, this is stealing.

We've actually heard something similar to this view before. As part of the 2006 triennial review of the effectiveness of the DMCA, a number of content-related industries filed a joint reply with the government on the effectiveness of the DMCA and the challenges that lay ahead for copyright. The argument relating to CDs espoused in the joint reply could be summarized: although nothing has prevented consumers from making backups of CDs, this cannot be construed as authorization from the music labels for them to do so. Thus, there has been no authorization of said backups, and the coincidental ability to make backups currently should not be mistaken for fair use.

Pariser's views appear to be similar, insofar as she clearly suggests that consumers have no right to make backups of the music that they have purchased in CD form or even in download form.

[Kingster]

I'm so glad that this case has gone to trial. Hopefully it will clear up a number of issues in the recording industry, but I'm not honestly holding my breath.

[Lunarbunny]

I'm sure I'm stealing a song every time my media player copies an .mp3 or .m4p to RAM. *cough*

[Angel_Mapper]

Every time you listen to a song more than once without paying for it again, you're stealing.

[JohnnySix]

If I pass the CD from my left hand to my right hand while taking it out of the case, is that stealing?

[N/\CHO]

Originally Posted by JohnnySix

If I pass the CD from my left hand to my right hand while taking it out of the case, is that stealing?

no, only if you pass it back to your left

[Hostile]

These people are biting the hand that feeds them. Eventually it will come back, and bit them in the ass!
From what I have been reading, looks as if it has already started.

[Manticore]

Originally Posted by Kingster

I'm so glad that this case has gone to trial. Hopefully it will clear up a number of issues in the recording industry, but I'm not honestly holding my breath.

Me neither.

Originally Posted by Angel_Mapper

Every time you listen to a song more than once without paying for it again, you're stealing.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking.

[Superchaz]

Originally Posted by Angel_Mapper

Every time you listen to a song more than once without paying for it again, you're stealing.

This brings up a slick idea. If instead of charging one dollar per download, they charged one penny per play, and one penny every time it was put to disk.

[-=JUDGE=-]

Originally Posted by Superchaz

This brings up a slick idea. If instead of charging one dollar per download, they charged one penny per play, and one penny every time it was put to disk.

Or they let us do what we want with the things we have purchased.

News flash.. the more they complain, the more they criticize, the more they turn the screws, the more they attack the consumers.. the more they will lose.

I've said it once and I will say it again.. make good music, people will buy it.

[PsxMeUP]

No no, you gotta release 5 records in 5 years, no matter how motivated you are. And the artist only gets to keep 1$ off every album sold, compared to the 7$ that go to the music companies (stores keep 50% I'm told). No wonder its the record labels that complain the most about piracy.

[DeadMeatGF]

Once you're signed to a label, every time you play your own song, you're stealing ...

[BigJim]

Is remembering a song really well and imagining it to yourself stealing?
I mean copying is copying, regardless of the storage device, be it disk or be it brain.

[phalanx]

record companys are greedy, and well the price of a PS3 speaks for itself sony wise (counts as stealing too in my bug heavy overpricing)
and radios dont play music for free they pay to play them wtf is this guy smokin

[Homeslice]

Once again, f**k the RIAA. I know they are behind this.

I guess I've stolen a bunch of CDs' worth of songs. How do you figure? Copy the tracks just to put them on my iPod.

Geeze, why not make everything illegal, greedy record companies?