Slashdot Mirror


Ford, GM Sued Over Vehicles' Ability To Rip CD Music To Hard Drive

Lucas123 writes: The Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies is suing Ford and General Motors for millions of dollars over alleged copyrights infringement violations because their vehicles' CD players can rip music to infotainment center hard drives. The AARC claims in its filing (PDF) that the CD player's ability to copy music violates the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992. The Act protects against distributing digital audio recording devices whose primary purpose is to rip copyrighted material. For example, Ford's owner's manual explains, "Your mobile media navigation system has a Jukebox which allows you to save desired tracks or CDs to the hard drive for later access. The hard drive can store up to 10GB (164 hours; approximately 2,472 tracks) of music." The AARC wants $2,500 for each digital audio recording device installed in a vehicle, the amount it says should have been paid in royalties.

3 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. I had to look up the AARC by Jahoda · · Score: 5, Informative

    I had actually never heard of these trolls. According to wikipedia, "AARC is a non-profit US royalty collective, assembled by the US music industry in conjunction with the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, that protects the rights of featured artists and recording companies(sound recording copyright owners) both domestically and abroad in the areas of hometaping/private copy royalties and rental royalties"

    In other words, lawyer parasites.

  2. Isn't this exempted? by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Act reads:

    No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.

    The Act defines a "digital musical recording" as:

    (5)(A) A “digital musical recording” is a material object —

    (i) in which are fixed, in a digital recording format, only sounds, and material, statements, or instructions incidental to those fixed sounds, if any, and

    (ii) from which the sounds and material can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

    http://www.copyright.gov/title...

    That Exemption was specifically to allow for home taping from CD to DAT and Minidisks, so it seems appropriate here.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  3. Re:Time Shifting? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not time shifting, but space shifting; which was upheld by the Ninth Circuit in RIAA v Diamond Multimedia like 15 years ago.

    They'll have no problem knocking this down whatsoever.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.