Quote:
Originally Posted by RawAlex
Actually, I thought about it a minute, and I have to add this:
In this case, the RIAA won. Almost undoubtedly, the woman found liable had heard the songs on the radio. Perhaps, she even heard the songs on XM or some other subscription based service. It is also likely that the people who received free copies of the song had also heard the song in the same manner. Perhaps some of them even attended a concert where one or more of the songs was performed.
None of those things gave her the right to seed the files out for distribution.
None of those things gave anyone the right to receive those files.
None of those things created a right of ownership or granted unlimited distribution rights.
Gideon, you are making a major, major mistake in your logic assuming that a fee paid once for one type of right grants you all other rights without limit for as long as you want. That just isn't the case.
|
Alex.. in the case of a song over the radio or a show over the television, there is no fee paid! You don't get distribution rights.. period.. the end. Those are retained by the copyright holder.
You as an individual have a right to copy something for yourself. Plain and simple. The original is supposed to be owned by you, not by someone else. If you make a recording of a song off the radio.. fine.. back it up if you like. don't back it up for someone else or offer it to someone else.. that's a violation. Same goes for a television recording, software, video file, etc etc etc.