File Trading is not illegal in America?!

[RZetlin]

Either this is entirely false information or the RIAA lawyers haven't read these laws.

http://trillian.mit.edu/~jc/ideas/AudioHomeRecordingAct.html

http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1993-01/0018.html

[Romanesque]

Of course file trading isn't illegal. If it was, a whole bunch of other things including the internet and computer networks in general would be illegal. By extension, file trading software isn't illegal, either.

Of course, people like the RIAA, the media, and the public itself have to go and mangle the language, vaguely referring to music pirates as "file swappers", etc.

So, changing the topic to "Music piracy is not illegal in America?!" or, more benignly, "Music swapping is not illegal in America?!"...

This is a slightly more gray area, but yeah, it still seems to be covered by taxes. However, just because this law exists doesn't mean that the RIAA can't afford lawyers to continue to work their way around it. Am I pessimistic? Yeah, I am. Even if the RIAA were to unexpectedly comply with this law, I'm sure they'll do everything in their power to ensure that it's used to extend taxes onto every possible digital medium.

Anyone know if hard drives are currently covered by this tax?

--Romey

[ZorBrak]

Lawyers like to bend words to their client's adavantage, usually to certain degrees of falsity. No, file trading is not illegal, however the free distribution of a company's copyrighted material is.

[Psycho Fox]

And before that 1992 law the copyright law stated that no mater what the licence agrement said every american had the right provided by the US gov to make up to 2 copies (one on site, one off) meaning max 2 copies no matter how many orginals you have for back up for video, audio (music) and software.

Meaning the US gov granted every US citizen the right to backup.

But I think this law been changed.

[Romanesque]

PLEASE CLOSE AND DELETE THIS THREAD! I wish I was a moderator:(, then I would be evil and wicked, like William C. Maune. (cackles until he runs out of breath)

Ahem...

So long as this thread remains purely in the realm of discussing the nature of copyright law (I see no reason why it shouldn't), there really isn't any problem with it.

--Romey

[Steve Jester]

There is a flaw, if the Artist choses not to recieve royalties from the government, they are essentially not alowing their material to be copied. And just because digital recording devices are taxed and royalties are distribuited doesn't mean that every hard drive is legal. Now, if you received your copy of files X Y and Z from a hard drive that was legal (a tax paid for copying) but song Z was of an artist not receiving royalties from the government and you were using p2p software, your copies of X and Y would be legal while your copy of Z wouldn't.

[czyznyck99]

That's exactly why file trading still exists. The copyright laws are much too obscure. All the more why I believe people in the RIAA support spyware installed in file swapping programs. What better way to advertise.

Later.

[RogueMartian]

Wait Wait Wait....

Do you mean to tell me that the american government, comprised of representatives supposedly elected by the majority of the people, would disregard the law in favor of helping big business?

Wow, I'm so disillusioned.

[JetMaster5]

Well, there is such thing as corruption....

....but, no. I don't think people would want to vote for representatives that will favor businesses. But, y'know, who knows what happens after the representatives are voted. After all, they've got more power over citizens, they can chose to either uphold the law, or abuse it for their own personal rewards.