Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is CD Copy Protection Illegal?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the wouldn't-it-be-nice dept.

ribbiting writes "US Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va. is asking RIAA execs to explain how they can collect royalties on various blank media at the same time that the RIAA members are implementing copy protection mechanisms, with particular reference to the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) of 1992." Glad someone is asking the question.

5 of 573 comments (clear)

  1. Re:No, I guess by lunenburg · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The problem is that the RIAA companies are getting paid royalties on every piece of blank media, regardless of how it's used, in exchange for allowing consumers to make legitimate copies of music, etc. Now, they want to keep getting their filthy lucre on all blank media, while at the same time reniging on their part of the bargain by blocking legitimate home copying.

    That's the problem, and I'm glad Rep. Boucher is making some sort of stand on this issue!

  2. In Canada... by MadCow42 · · Score: 2, Redundant

    A few years back they added a "tax" to recordable media to "help compensate the recording industry" for pirating that happens on such media.

    Now, if the RIAA were to "prevent" (haha) such pirating through copy protection, why should they get to double-dip by continuing to collect the revenues from that "tax"?

    You can't have your Cake and Rip it too.

    MadCow.

    --
    I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
  3. Worst year in a decade for album sales by ouija147 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Yeah, well if they weren't pushing all the boy bands down everyones throats maybe sales might have been better. Blame everyone for poor album sales ... maybe they should look at the dreck they are foisting on the consumer.

  4. You can't have your cake... by Bonker · · Score: 2, Redundant

    The 'blank media' tax has been touted in every country it's been implimented in as a way to pay publishers and artists for the perceived costs of media copying, be it fair use or piracy.

    In the U.S., the media companies get a large piece of that fee.

    That they want the right to collect both this fee *and* impliment copy controls is what is being questioned here.

    Personally, I think it should boil down to one or the other. Pay the tax or pay for copy protected CD's. Not that either is really effective, but...

    Hopefully, Boucher will raise a large enough stink over this that it will actually cause some changes. Not likely, but there's always hope...

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
  5. older CD's by eremos · · Score: 0, Redundant
    The RIAA could argue that blank media is still being taxed because of older CD's that don't have copy-protection.