Trading could be considered illegal

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Snow Dog wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ sure it is - a compact disc is not virtual. It's a piece of plastic, some paper and a plastic case. Of course you can sell it. Are you deliberately not understanding???? Its not just a piece of plastic, if it was we would have nothing to write about! About a month ago there was a lengthy article in my favorite computer magazine. From that I gather that it's absolutely legal (at least in Germany) to sell CDs and DVDs. Other countries might be different, but Germany is one of the most strict countries in terms of copyright ... Why are you all so concerned about the word "distribution"? It hasn't got much to do with selling a used CD, has it?

Mike..is this a wind up? At NO POINT have I said that its illegal to sell DVDs or CDs!!!

Many questions, will go 1 by one

1.-

Easy Livin wrote: Ivan, It's great that you are keeping an eye on such things on behalf of the site. I must admit, i find it astonishing that offering to sell CDs or DVDs you have legally bought may be illegal. There must be second hand CD and DVD shops world-wide. Are they really technically breaking the law every time they buy or sell a CD or DVD? IMO it's not a felony, this warning is wrong, illegal and attempts against the right of property. But the RIAA and their partners outside US created a legal fiction, you don't buy a CD or DVD, you buy the right to play it in your house for your personal use, that's why they say that even lending it ois a copyright infridgement. Probably with a good lawyer) any person would win the case, but RIAA and their friends don't want or need to win the case, the legal fees are so high that if they sue any person or small society, they will have to settle. Most of the people sued by the RIAA for downloadin could be forced to pay US$ 125,000.00 "PER SONG" but almost all the cases were settled in US$ 12,000,00 because nobody could afford a trial. Second hand stores may be acting against his rule, but we know RIAA doesn't care for this small traders, their enemy is INTERNET, not only for illegal downloading but because sites explain to the possible clients which album is good and which one is crap, they want people to buy blindly without any info. Plus probably 2nd hand stores have authorizatoion of the labels. The other thing you could perhaps clarify. Does the site have any responsibility if people chose to trade in CDs and DVDs (legitimate ones, not bootlegs, copies etc.)? I.E. If the site is not actually offering to buy or sell the CDs itself, can it be implicated because someone posed a message here? The site can't be considered responsible for what people do, but can be accused of encouraging or at least allowing illegal activities if WE don't block the threads and make an specific anouncement against this activities.

2.-

Snow Dog wrote: I never did understand why its illegal to copy a CD for someone and yet ok to sell it second hand.

Well if you copy a CD FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE it's legal (At least it was until a few months ago), but if you copy a CD for another person (with or without profit) you are duplicating copyrighted material without being owner and giving it to another person who won't buy it.

All started with the  famous process  called  The Betamax case (Universal Studios vs Sony Corporation of America -NOW PARTNERS WITH RIAA- ).

Universal studios sued Sony because they said that the Betamax would be used to make illegal copies of copyrighted movies, at the end the sales of Viedo players were so high and everybody had a VCR or Betamax, that it was futile (Both companies had illimited resources, so they were able to appeal and appeal and appeal and the trial lasted a long time), so they created terms, in which a movie could not be sold in Video Cassettes and a period in which it could not be showed on TV.

People was allowed to make personal copies, but not to sell them.

3.-

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ sure it is - a compact disc is not virtual. It's a piece of plastic, some paper and a plastic case. Of course you can sell it.

No Mike, you own the plastic of the CD and the plastic of the case, but the author and/or publisher owns the material recorded and the art on the cover, you are only granted an authorization to make personal use of it.

Silly, but that's the law.

4.-

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^theoretically it may be possible that even the artist him/erself is not authorized to sell those recordings, or to give them away for free. I remember that on the Devin Townsend homepage a link to a bootleg was removed a couple of weeks later "on request of the record label". Apparently sometimes the record label has more rights than the artist.

Not theoretically Mike it's  a fact, unless the author is the publisher, in USA, Canada, UK and in most of the world, the first 25 years after the release of an album, the owner was the publisher. After this period and for a lapse between then and 50 to 120 years (Depending on specific laws) the author or his/her family owns the rights.

Duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works.         12.—(1) Copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work expires at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies, subject to the following provisions of this section. Note: In USA the terms reach 120 years after the first publication in some cases. Duration of copyright in typographical arrangement of published editions.         15.    Copyright in the typographical arrangement of a published edition expires at the end of the period of 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the edition was first published. This is the key article, the publisher owns everything for 25 years (Periods of time may change depending in the country) http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_2.htm

This is in UK, but it's similar in almost all the world, even though I believe some things have changed due to USA laws, but normally the new artist transfers his rights to a publisher during a determined period of time, because this lkabel assumes the risk, pays advertising, release the albums and organize concerts.

That's why Rick Wakeman couldn't release Criminal Record and No Eartly Connection until a few years ago. A&M owned the rights and was not interested in releasing them as CD's, but they didn't granted Rick the rights to publish it.

In some cases check Yes coppyrights, for example in Fragile songs appear Copyright Atlantic Records (Or their bussiness partners) but in later versions like Keys Live, you see the copyright in favour of Yessongs Ltd. or Topographic Music, because the publisher's right had already expired.

So maybe the author agrees to put his work in the net but the publisher says no, and it's no.

Geck0 wrote: But surely live recordings are separate to the record company?  Do record companies really have the right to the recordings of every live recording?  Even those ones done in a basement in the guitarist's house, to a small audience? The author can play in public his songs without asking poermission to anybody else, but if he makes a live album, he must include copyright ownership and pay royalties, UNLESS there's an agreement between the author and the publisher allowiing the band to own the rights of live albums. After the publisher right has prescribed, any co author can do whatever he wants with his music. That's why in Tokyo Tapes you can find Genesis, Asia and King Crimson tracks, because co authors of this works participated in the show. And previously Steve Hackett published Genesis Revisited with his own label.

Now the last one:

GoldenSpiral wrote: I have to ask this question:  is there an organization in UK and elsewhere that has as much political power there as the RIAA does in America?  I ask because the more you read, the more you find that the RIAA has several government organizations, particularly the FBI and FCC, in its front pocket.  the FCC is beginning to pass really oppressive laws regarding public broadcast (this affects me as an independent radio jockey).  Because of the RIAA, there are laws and hefty fines issued for playing too many songs from the same artist in a certain time span.  In essence, if I wanted to play a live album from a certain band in its entirety, I could be fined heavily by the FCC, all because the RIAA is afraid someone is at home recording the show.  This seems F-ing ridiculous to me, and I'm wondering if there are similar rules in other countries?

Yes there is, the laws I quoted above are from UK, the organization in UK is called BPI

The BPI is the British record industry's trade association. We have represented the interests of British record companies since being formally incorporated in 1973 when our principal aim was to fight the growing problem of music piracy. Our membership comprises of more than 320 companies including all four major record companies, associate members such as manufacturers and distributors plus hundreds of independent music companies representing literally thousands of labels which together account for over 90% of recorded music output in the UK.   The BPI secretariat, with the support of its committees, implements the BPI Council's strategies on behalf of the UK record industry as a whole. The Council is elected at the AGM by BPI members and comprises representatives from majors and independent record companies alike   http://www.bpi.co.uk/.

 

Don't ask me who enforces them, maybe Scottland Yard, but I honestly don't know the laws of UK.

Hope it helps, but remember, I'm not a USA, Canada or UK lawyer and of course I'm not acting as one, just telling you what I read and analyze according to international principles, my interpretation may be different in some cases and the Jurisprudence may say something contradictory (Remember, juries are formed by people who know a sh!t of law), but I believe the terms are clear enough.

Iván

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: 3.- MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ sure it is - a compact disc is not virtual. It's a piece of plastic, some paper and a plastic case. Of course you can sell it. No Mike, you own the plastic of the CD and the plastic of the case, but the author and/or publisher owns the material recorded and the art on the cover, you are only granted an authorization to make personal use of it. Silly, but that's the law. 4.-

Not in Germany. In German legislation there are some rights of the user that the publishers cannot take away. One of these laws is commonly referred to as "Privatkopie" (private copy) ... I can copy any CD or DVD for private use, even if the publisher says that I must not do it and threatens me with legal punishment. Currently there is some discussion about whether or not copy protection mechanisms may be circumvented in order to make the copy ... but still. And trust me: I am allowed to sell any DVD which I bought, unless that for some reason it is generally forbidden to offer this DVD in Germany (due to import restrictions or similar). 

Iván wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^theoretically it may be possible that even the artist him/erself is not authorized to sell those recordings, or to give them away for free. I remember that on the Devin Townsend homepage a link to a bootleg was removed a couple of weeks later "on request of the record label". Apparently sometimes the record label has more rights than the artist. Not theoretically Mike it's  a fact, unless the author is the publisher, in USA, Canada, UK and in most of the world, the first 25 years after the release of an album, the owner was the publisher. After this period and for a lapse between then and 50 to 120 years (Depending on specific laws) the author or his/her family owns the rights.

I'm 100% sure that you can sell any legitimate (that is: no bootleg or unauthorized copy) DVD that you previously bought. In Germany and most other countries.

Consider this: If selling DVDs was really illegal, don't you think that a) there would be clear warnings instead of words like "distribution" which can, under some circumstances and using legal "trickery", be interpreted to also include the sale of used DVDs by private persons ... and b) Ebay would be aware of this and prevent CD auctions like they prevent other legally questionable items and finally c) that there would be lawsuits or at least public discussions about the possibility of lawsuits?

Sorry, but for any other country than the U.S.A. (consider the Patriot Act, Millenium Copyright Act and Department of Homeland Security) this is pure paranoia. And even in the United States I'm 99% certain that nobody will ever be prosecuted for selling used CDs that they bought in legitimate stores.

^ about that "trade" thing: It is true that it is not permitted to sell North American DVDs in the EU (and vice versa). That also applies to audio CDs ... so indeed (like I also said earlier) I have to be careful in Germany if I choose to sell a CD which I bought through Caiman USA (amazon.de Mmarketplace merchant) ... I have to make sure that the exact same CD is available in Europe, or otherwise it would be possible that I might be sued. However, all that could happen is that I pay a small fine, because I would have no problem to show that I don't sell CDs for a living.

MIKE: Could find an analysis of German Copyright Act in English and could partially decipher it from German, and the limitations to transference of inytellectual property are very interesting and unique:

Ownership is different than authorship In some jurisdictions, for instance in Germany, copyright cannot be transferred at all. As a result, the owner of a copyrighted work needs to obtain the copyrightholder's permission for a number of uses of the work. The Rijksmuseum does not have to go through this cumbersome process, since the work of arts in its collection are no longer protected by copyright. They are part of the public domain.

You can buy a copyright from the author, but a aparently you have to ask permission to the author for many acts, probably to avoid cases as Paul Mc'Cartney vs Michael Jackson in which a copyright holder sold Beatles material to a third person (Wacko Jacko) without the permission opf the authors.

Interesting, will have to search more, I love laws as much as music, specially when they challenge my mental structures as in this case, that goes against evrything I took for granted.

I can't understand how a label owner will agree to hire a band with this limitations, unless they  submit themselves to a foreign law that is more permisive.

Holy God, I feel like a child with a new toy.

Iván