Audio Format Shifting To Be OK'd In New Zealand

Bloodrage writes "The New Zealand government is about to define a small part of the rights assumed by the 'fair use' clause in the Copyright Act 1994. Essentially they are going to protect the consumers' rights to convert media from one format to another for personal use, making it clearly legal to transfer tracks from a commercial CD to a mix-CD, MP3 player, PDA, PC, 8-track, or tuned array of hummingbirds. NZ law already makes it clear that gifting or reselling items includes a transfer all of rights, including copyright, warantee, and licencing agreements, so providing your original is the genuine article you're not a criminal. An article in the The Dominion Post gives an outline of the responses from the recording industry and why the government is considering it. It boils down to; this is 'fair use' and don't argue, and that the government can't see how the alternative could be (affordably) enforced."

Comments

Why is this even an issue?

[metallicagoaltender]

Legally I know why it is, but realistically, what's the problem?

I have a large CD collection, and like to keep digital versions of some CDs I listen to frequently on my hard drive (never shared), or burn CDs to carry around with me so I don't have to worry about theft/damage/loss to the original. Why could that even be a problem? Sure, people can pirate, but people are going to find a way to pirate regardless.

Maybe I'm missing the logic of recording execs, but how is pissing consumers off by limiting their rights going to encourage them to buy more CDs?

Re:Why is this even an issue?

[Eythian]

Have i bought the rights to "Dark Side of the Moon" as an entity, or just as a particular instance?

It would be fairly easy, and somewhat reasonable, to argue that you have bought the rights to the non-SACD CD version only, as there is talent (and significant man-hours) going into the production of the extra enhancements in the SACD version that aren't in the other version.

You're not helping

[fpga_guy]

I don't know why you feel you have some god given right to freely distribute something that you don't own...

I'm all for fair use - I bought it, I can transfer media, backup and so on.

But insistence that you should be able to freely distribute material is just ammunition for the RIAA, ARIA and other industry lobbiest bastards' weapons against fair use.

Wisdom From Deep Down Under

[amigoro]

From the country that gave us LOTR and the All Blacks, comes something equally important: A piece of sensible legislation.

There is a lesson to be learned here. There's no economic loss to record companies when people copy their own CDs to MP3s or some other digital format. However, it will cost the government millions to enforce a law that prevents that.

Therefore, the sensible thing to do is, let the people copy their own music. As long as they don't pass it on illegitimately (which, actually happens even if you ban copying once own CDs), this should be a solution that makes both the companies, the people, and the the industry happy.

It's high time other countries followed soot.

Three cheers to the Kiwis!!!

Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny

This is what upsets me

[paramecio]

"More blank CDs are now sold in New Zealand than pre-recorded discs."

Shit, man! Main use for blank CDs is not music-and-video-piracy for many of us. I do backups, store my five-megapixel pictures and burn linux distros to give away to my friends! And I'm just avoid talking about hard disks...

I feel sick! Stop this madness!

I would like Sony NZ to Explain

[Blue_Wombat]

Sony NZ should be asked to explain this quote from the article: "Sony NZ managing director Michael Glading said he was totally opposed to the move, which he believed would 'open the floodgates' to unrestricted piracy."

Sony NZ sells Minidisc recorders with software to rip CDs. Also, the NZ Sony Style shop (corner of Lambton Quay and Willis Street for any interested Kiwis) last week (it may still be there this week, have not looked) had a *huge* window display exhibiting their new hard drive jukebox product. This included photos of all the stacks of CDs you could do away with by copying them to said jukebox.

Furthermore, given that the NZ recording industry association clearly opposes this, and considers it illegal and "theft" at present, will they explain why they don't: (1) expel Sony NZ (which is a member); and (2) seek criminal prosecution of Sony executives. After all, Sony is selling the tools that permit the "theft" from their members, and blatantly advertising this capability as the main reason to purchase

It is a bit rich for Sony to sell products and then lobby for it to be illegal for the hapless consumer to use the products Sony has sold them.

Now the obligatory:

1. Sell overpriced product to consumers

2. Profit

3. Lobby to keep using what you have just sold illegal

4. Prosecute your customers for buying from you

5. More profit

A business strategy to make the RIANZ and RIAA proud.

Selling the same thing over and over again is good

[GreatDrok]

For the producers of the media.

Look at the windfall that occured when CD came in, large amounts of profit made from people buying the same material again on the new format. Now that it is in digital format, how is the industry going to repeat that windfall now that everyone has bought pretty much every CD they are ever likely to need and the current music production is ghastly. I for one know that the 2.7K tracks I have on my iPod is quite frankly enough. If people are able to copy this material for their own use then you can have backups.

Strictly speaking when you buy a CD you are buying a license to the material, not he delivery media. By preventing people from being able to copy the material they have a license to onto a fresh media platform the record companies are trying to preserve the cash flow generated by selling people multiple licenses to the same thing which is frankly, money for old rope!

Incidentally, a similar thing has happened with TV, certainly in the UK anyway. Here if you get Sky (Murdoch's digital sat system) you get a single box and a single card. If you want to record one channel and watch another you need two boxes and two subscriptions, paying twice for the same thing. This also strikes me as quite unfair.