Call to exempt iPod 'rippers' from prosecution
By Anthony Barnes and Sophie Goodchild
Published: 29 October 2006

For millions of people it is now the only way to enjoy their fix of Arctic Monkeys, Razorlight or even Girls Aloud. Pop a CD into a computer, "rip" the contents, and then play it back on their iPod. It is also illegal, and is claimed to cost the music industry hundreds of millions of pounds.

Now ministers are being urged to relax copyright laws to prevent music fans from facing prosecution for what is now common practice. The Institute for Public Policy Research think-tank has recommended an overhaul of the legislation to allow a "private right to copy" music, and thus stop home users being treated the same as large-scale pirates.

A majority of Britons admit to "ripping" CDs on to their computers for playback on other devices such as iPods and other MP3 players; and a National Consumer Council survey recently found that three-fifths of adults believe it to be perfectly legal to do so.

The IPPR said a upcoming review of intellectual property, set up by Chancellor Gordon Brown and chaired by Andrew Gowers, should update the copyright laws to take account of the changes in the way people listen to music and watch films. Its report, Public Innovation: Intellectual Property in a Digital Age, said the new right would have no significant impact on copyright holders.

Ian Kearns, deputy director of the IPPR, said: "Millions of Britons copy CDs on to their home computers, breaking copyright laws every day. British copyright law is out of date. When it comes to protecting the interests of copyright holders, the emphasis the music industry has put on tackling illegal distribution, and not prosecuting for personal copying, is right. But it is not the industry's job to decide what rights consumers have. That is the job of Government."

The advent of the digital age was initially damaging to the music industry, as it failed to embrace the use of computers for storing and playing back songs. Computer users then turned to file-sharing sites such as Napster to expand their collections for free.

For millions of people it is now the only way to enjoy their fix of Arctic Monkeys, Razorlight or even Girls Aloud. Pop a CD into a computer, "rip" the contents, and then play it back on their iPod. It is also illegal, and is claimed to cost the music industry hundreds of millions of pounds.

Now ministers are being urged to relax copyright laws to prevent music fans from facing prosecution for what is now common practice. The Institute for Public Policy Research think-tank has recommended an overhaul of the legislation to allow a "private right to copy" music, and thus stop home users being treated the same as large-scale pirates.

A majority of Britons admit to "ripping" CDs on to their computers for playback on other devices such as iPods and other MP3 players; and a National Consumer Council survey recently found that three-fifths of adults believe it to be perfectly legal to do so.

The IPPR said a upcoming review of intellectual property, set up by Chancellor Gordon Brown and chaired by Andrew Gowers, should update the copyright laws to take account of the changes in the way people listen to music and watch films. Its report, Public Innovation: Intellectual Property in a Digital Age, said the new right would have no significant impact on copyright holders.

Ian Kearns, deputy director of the IPPR, said: "Millions of Britons copy CDs on to their home computers, breaking copyright laws every day. British copyright law is out of date. When it comes to protecting the interests of copyright holders, the emphasis the music industry has put on tackling illegal distribution, and not prosecuting for personal copying, is right. But it is not the industry's job to decide what rights consumers have. That is the job of Government."

The advent of the digital age was initially damaging to the music industry, as it failed to embrace the use of computers for storing and playing back songs. Computer users then turned to file-sharing sites such as Napster to expand their collections for free.

"Pop a CD into a computer, "rip" the contents, and then play it back on their iPod. It is also illegal"

Wrong. (At least in the USA. The RIAA and the industry might want you to THINK it is an illegal act, but it falls under the umbrella of fair use.)

BBC NEWS
Copying own CDs 'should be legal'
A think-tank has called for outdated copyright laws to be rewritten to take account of new ways people listen to music, watch films and read books.

The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) is calling for a "private right to copy".

It would decriminalise millions of Britons who break the law each year by copying their CDs onto music players.

Making copies of CDs and DVDs for personal use would have little impact on copyright holders, the IPPR argues.

Copyright issues have, in the past, been steered too much by the music industry, the report said.

Public respect

IPPR deputy director Dr Ian Kearns said: "When it comes to protecting the interests of copyright holders, the emphasis the music industry has put on tackling illegal distribution and not prosecuting for personal copying, is right.

"But it is not the music industry's job to decide what rights consumers have that is the job of government."

According to research from the National Consumer Council, more than half of British consumers are infringing copyright law by copying CDs onto their computers, iPods or other MP3 players.

Report author Kay Withers said: "The idea of all-rights reserved doesn't make sense for the digital era and it doesn't make sense to have a law that everyone breaks. To give the IP regime legitimacy it must command public respect."

Intellectual property laws are currently being reviewed by the government.

Chancellor Gordon Brown has asked chairman Sir Andrew Gowers to report his findings back ahead of the pre-budget report in November.

The IPPR is hoping to influence this with its report, entitled Public Innovation: Intellectual property in a digital age.

Its key recommendation is that any policy regarding Intellectual Property policy should recognise that knowledge is a public resource first and a private asset second.

Social glue

The so-called knowledge economy is growing fast as the traditional manufacturing of goods is replaced by more intangible assets.

With it is a growing paradox in which intellectual property is both a commercial and cultural resource.

Knowledge must, therefore, perform the roles of both commodity and social glue, both private property and public domain,
IPPR report

"The internet offers unprecedented opportunities to share ideas and content," the report says.

"Knowledge must, therefore, perform the roles of both commodity and social glue, both private property and public domain," it adds.

The report looks at how Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies - which restrict the sharing of music or other intellectual property - are affecting attempts to preserve electronic content.

It argues that the British Library should be given a DRM-free copy of any new digital work and that libraries should be able to take more than one copy of digital work.

Ms Withers said: "We charge the British Library as being the collective memory of the nation and increasingly it has to archive digital content.

"More and more academic journals are delivered digitally but copyright laws aren't designed to deal with digital content."

She said there was often a conflict between DRM and accessibility technologies which needs to be addressed.

"Someone with poor sight may use a screen reader technology and may have to change the format of the content to use it but some DRM technology isn't sophisticated enought to take this kind of thing into account," she said.

The report also calls for the government to reject calls from the UK music industry to extend the copyright term for sound recording beyond the current 50 years.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/6095612.stm

Published: 2006/10/29 09:34:45 GMT

© BBC MMVI

leflaw's probably freaked out as much as my by the rememberance and realization that over in the UK, you are NOT legally allowed to make a personal use copy of a CD you legally purchased.
..........
No,

I am NOT gonna stop "bad-mouthing" the rights and bad laws we have lost HERE in the USA over the past couple of years in regards to fair-use...

But HOLLY MOLLY FU*K

The Brit's STILL are not able to back-up a LEGALLY purchaced CD to thier hard drive?

if i buy a cd.. i should be allowed to rip it as long as its for me.

"should"

is the operative word here

"copyright": I have the Right to Copy it

legal and illegal vs right and wrong. If I can't copy it (for my own private fair usage) then Im not gonna buy it.
Boycott continues.

Yep we ain't allowed to do shit with the music, as far as I am aware, the bullshit logic was that when we bought a CD, we only bought the right to listen to that CD and that meant no personal copying (even though there was a law that existed that allowed us to make one backup for personal reasons, guess that's long gone) and when the CD wore out, we had to buy another... Music industry propaganda to keep their cartel funds boosted.

"But it is not the industry's job to decide what rights consumers have. That is the job of Government."

Fortunately, at least for the time being, we are not overrun by the corporations and run silently and ruthlessly by a few private businesses... but I'm sure that time will come.

There was a discussion about this on Slashdot. While there was some disagreement on whether or not it is the goverment's job to determine what our rights are, there was no argument that it was NOT the music industry's job.

Record labels in the U.S. stamped "NOT FOR BROADCAST" on their product after radio got started. Radio ignored them.

Just like we're all ignoring them now.

Who cares if it's legal? It's only illegal if you can get in trouble for it. I haven't seen a cop stop anyone to check their DAP yet and bring it into their lab to ensure all the files were bought from an online music service, or independent.

Thaspian brings up a good point. Laws are only as good as the ability to enforce them. How are you supposed to enforce laws prohibiting the copying of CD's onto computers without trampling other personal rights? They may not have a Bill Of Rights in England, but we sure have one here in the US. And enforcing any law when it is common practice to violate it is useless.