Slashdot Mirror
CD Ripper 'Incites Law Breaking,' Says British Regulator
Barence writes "A British firm has been banned from advertising a CD ripping device because it 'incites law breaking.' The Brennan JB7 is 'a CD player with a hard disk that stores up to 5,000 CDs.' The adverts for the Brennan highlight the convenience of ripping your entire CD collection to the device – much like we've all been doing for years on our PCs, iPods and other MP3 players. The Advertising Standards Authority has banned the ads after concluding 'that the ad misleadingly implied it was acceptable to copy CDs, vinyl and cassettes without the permission of the copyright owner.'"
The UK doesn't have the US's fair use rules, so technically ripping your CDs is illegal, although its never enforced (at least not against individuals) .
Record shops were always happy to sell blank cassettes, CD-Rs and MiniDiscs - you just don't shatter the illusion that an awful lot of customers are amateur musicians taping their own work by going up to the assistant and saying "Dear assistant, can you recommend a blank CD onto which I can copy this here album which I am about to purchase?"
Basically, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".
In this case, some public-spirited person has submitted a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority about this particular ad, so there's not much the ASA can do but say, yeah, the ad incites copyright violation.
Note that its the specific ad that's been banned - not the product. The ASA is an independent industry regulator, not a court of law - nobody has been prosecuted. The manufacturer will just have to stick in some small print.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
"Rip. Mix. Burn." Don't you watch TV? That was an Apple ad.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Because it's too obviously something everyone does. By making it something everyone does but not obviously so, you get a useful tool in your hands. Because it's not like anyone could credibly claim that everyone HAS to do it, simply to live.
Another example, similar but not as dangerous, is our "TV-Tax" hunters. They come to your door and simply claim if you didn't pay your "TV tax" (that you "only" have to pay if you actually have a TV) that you're breaking the law because it's implausible that you don't have one. They're not even weaseling about it, they simply flat out accuse you of having a TV "illegally" if you don't pay for having one. The idea that you might exist without a TV is deemed impossible.
It's not like people support such laws. It's simply that they either don't care, or that they think it won't hit them, mostly because everyone does it and they can't arrest ALL of us. No, 'they' won't. They'll single the ones out that are in some other way "unwanted".
Reminds me of the animal rights activists who're currently under trial in Austria for (allegedly) breaking a law that was created to battle international terrorism. (Un)fortunately the law enforcement is SO inapt and bumbling that the whole thing descends into a very embarrassing mess and is generally seen as a big joke by the media and population alike. Unfortunately, it pretty much ruins the lives of those accused, and all because they targeted a store that has good ties with one of the ruling parties...
That's what such "catch-all" laws are created for and what they're abused for: To silence dissenters.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The previous Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was also embarrassed over this issue. In an interview he claimed that he mostly listened to The Beatles on his iPod. At the time, there was no digital download available for any Beatles songs, and ripping songs from a CD is illegal under UK copyright law. When this was subsequently pointed out, there was a hurried statement that Brown had mis-spoke and listened to the Beatles on his CD player, not the iPod. Hilarious.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire