• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Copyright. Are We Legally Bound To Keep A Physical Copy?

+48V

+48V

hi-fi or die
Are you legally bound to keep a physical copy of your music media after you have recorded or ripped for personal use?

This has been an age old question since the dawn of digital copies. Making copies is addressed in many forms and fashions in section 17 with amendments of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 and forward. Of note and reference is the ....

Copyright Act 1976
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf <--whole shebang
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/ <--summary and linked sections
Home Recording Act (AHRA-1992)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-106/pdf/STATUTE-106-Pg4237.pdf
Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act (DPRA-1995)
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi...e=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ39.104.pdf
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA-1998)
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-105publ304/pdf/PLAW-105publ304.pdf

Whenever questions of ripping/copying one’s collection comes up here, there’s a contingent that faithfully chime in claiming/warning that “by law” you must keep a physical copy or you are subject to severe penalties for copyright infringement per the Copyright Act and it's sections like the DMCA, Fair Use, AHRA, etc...
Please help me...I can't find such.

I’ve been involved with many facets of the music biz and digital rights for several years. I’ve been party to many groups and legislative efforts that found me fairly deep into reading and following the dos and don’ts regarding digital copies and transmission. And I have yet to find any verbiage in the linked laws above and other related govt. docs where it specifically states that an individual consumer is required to retain a physical copy (CD/Vinyl/Tape/Whathaveyou) after they’ve been transferred to other media.

A beyond tedious read and exhausting to muddle through. So hey, it’s entirely possible I've missed something…somewhere so relevant over the years. So for all those that hold that as a consumer it’s illegal and punishable to not retain your original physical copy, I’m most welcome to stand corrected and clear the armchair air. Let's all try and learn something.

Thoughts? Citations please.


Play nice pilgrims…..:)
 
Register to hide this ad
I'd subjectively say: "If you destroy the original you are ok."

Obviously selling it is not ok.
 
yes. ask Marc Avsec (keyboardist of the Cruisers, aka 'Donnie Iris and the cruisers'), who in his spare time is an IPL lawyer.
 
I am not a lawyer obviously, but I assume that the advice to retain the physical media is because that is the easiest way to prove that you have a legal right to it.

Completely apropos of nothing, my dad went to high school with Donnie Ierace (stage name "Iris") and his wife cut my hair when I was a little kid. Nice people.
 
+48V said:
Please help me...I can't find such.
Click to expand...
Nor can I. I spent a good bit of time reading and searching text within the PDF archives. The word "media" is used three times in the Home Recording Act and any mention of retention is missing. All you find in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is mention of video formats (including 8mm and betamax!) and library use of records. I did find references to prohibiting the distribution of "phonorecords"

What of content never originating on media? An increasing part of my music library is sourced from a range of downloadable sources: HD Tracks, Presto Classical, Bandcamp, etc.

ev13wt said:
I'd subjectively say: "If you destroy the original you are ok." Obviously selling it is not ok.
Click to expand...
How about donating it? The question remains: kindly point out the "retain media" statute.

This topic reminds of a story NPR did on the "drink 8 glasses of clear water a day" adage. They couldn't find any medical reference to back that old claim. Water, yes. But water is found in countless other beverages and foods.
 
Last edited:
Just found an interesting discussion on Stereophile and in particular, prophetic comments made ten years ago by a patent attorney. Scroll to "flohmann's" comments May 21 at 12:08.

"Imagine 10 years from now, when nearly everyone will have transitioned to computer-based copies of their entire music library. Is every person in America required to retain their inventory of CDs in their attics forever? What possible utility does that serve? Do we prefer that all CDs end up in the landfill? That's obviously precisely what the first sale doctrine was intended to avoid. For my part, I'm keeping my CDs until I have lossless, redundant, backed-up copies on some future digital music system. I don't expect that will arrive in my house for a few more years."
 
E-Stat said:
How about donating it? The question remains: kindly point out the "retain media" statute.
Click to expand...

Whatever the answer is for selling it would certainly also apply to donating. Any argument to the contrary would be playing devils advocate either just for the purpose of doing so or just plain wanting it to be otherwise.

My personal opinion is that in this day and age this is strictly an academic argument as long as you aren’t running afoul of other copyright laws such as digital sharing, ripping and selling on a large scale or broadcasting.
 
It appears that the US law is vague on this matter, and a test case has not yet been tried. The Redigi case is interesting, but dos not really apply to the sale of a CD. Until this issue is clearer, I'm keeping all my CDs. Also, all my ripped music is lossy MP3, so keeping the CDs makes sense for that reason also.
 
Enforcement of this provision in the United States would require a police state of unimaginable proportions. I mean how can a government keep track of which cds you have ripped/copied and which cds you have sold or thrown away or given to Aunt Milly. It appears that for the end user the DMCA is primarily enforced by the "honor" system.
 
In most cases, the original media IS your personal license proving your rights to your cop(ies).

Same holds true with digital downloads vice physical. Most of those have a unique signature encoded within establishing it's source, destination, time of purchase, etc. Read the small print on those, and it's non-transferable and the property of the original purchaser in perpetuity. Finally - something I can take with me to the grave! ;-}

Another fun bit - a lot of physical media includes a license for a "free" digital download of said material. I see a lot of these being sold or given away as gifts. Also not legal, as in this case, BOTH are for your personal use only unless you transfer ownership of the physical media.
 
Theoretically speaking, properly implemented DRM pulls and stores a unique IP address registering a copy to the purchaser. Any attempt to play said copy back on another machine should fail ... good reason to stick with physical media as you're not held hostage as to whether DRM is having a bad hair day ...
 
icenine said:
Enforcement of this provision in the United States would require a police state of unimaginable proportions. I mean how can a government keep track of which cds you have ripped/copied and which cds you have sold or thrown away or given to Aunt Milly. It appears that for the end user the DMCA is primarily enforced by the "honor" system.
Click to expand...
short answer?

every piece of media in the last 20+ years has a unique volser attached to it and when you play it on an ijunk or microsoft media player or any internet aware device it makes a ticky mark to a database somewhere, if the same volser shows up somewhere else, evidence of the 'crime' is now in place. all it takes is someone with a few moments to make you the focal point of an investigation.

do they follow up on this now? only in egregious cases where there is clear piracy. could they in the future? sure. all electronic communications belong to the govt and it is up to them to decide where and when to hand it out, with or without warrants. its a small slice of a big pie that we agree to every day when we log on or click an eula....
 
4-2-7 said:
I'll just do what I want, kinda hard to bleed a turnip nor is it even worth it.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
I basically do whatever I want within reason. I know what the laws say, but nobody really cares unless you do something REALLY stupid. I mean look how much copyrighted music is posted on Youtube.o_O And, is anyone that had anything to do with making the music really making any money off all the used records, CDs, tapes, etc that we buy at thrift stores, used record stores, or wherever? Nope.

With that said, I don't listen to much of any current music, but if I did I would at least try to support the artist. Though, I wonder how much (or little, actually) they make when you buy a new album. But, I'm honestly not going to lose any sleep worrying about copying some old song or album.:rolleyes:

I say do whatever your conscience allows you to do.
 
Reminds me of some fun I had posting a video of my light show to YouTube. It kept giving me grief about copyrights and such, even with just a short clip. Got around that with a bit of creative over-dubbing ... <G>

 
These copyright laws are more about protecting Disney's right to Mickey Mouse than anything else. If you don't go after the Mouse you should be ok.
Mickey drives a mean black helicopter.
 
This has been discussed since reel to reel recorders hit the market and 8 track then the cassette tape which the industry said would ruin them. They had no idea what was coming and then the PC with a cd burner hit the market. Burning copies and selling them is illegal and unethical. But if I copy a disc for a friend I don't sweat that plus that if they like the music what has happened is they start to purchase there music. Same for me when downloading sites were still around I would download and check out new music. If I liked it I would purchase it on cd, if not I would just delete it. I discovered The Presets and the Shins this way who know take up half a dozen spaces on my cd rack. Of course with something like this there will be those that take it over the top.
 
I have consulted with my attorney on this, and he is looking into it.. :rolleyes:
Seriously, it is highly unlikely that anyone will be coming after anyone else over missing CD's. Perhaps, and this is a long shot, that if you are a really bad sort, have been a menace to society, have ties to the mob, whatever, that they could use your pirated music library to help get you off the streets. After all they got Al Capone on tax evasion!

I take a different approach to this. New music, I would never copy and redistribute. I actually WANT to support artists work, and feel downright good when I pay for a CD, and know that I am sending money to a good performer. However, music from yesteryear, where the original artists, if even alive are old, and not performing, or maybe don't even own the rights to their music anymore, I am okay with selling, giving it away, whatever, especially when they are not still involved with the music today. I care about artists, but not so much Aires..

As far as what's legal or not, I have my own moral compass I suppose. It supersedes most law on the books although much of it is in alignment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom