If it's called intellectual property then why don't get artists get paid when I buy a used CD on Amazon?
Just sayin.
Just sayin.
Used CD intellectual property hypocrisy (I think)
- Thread starter Genius Gone Insane
- Start date
egan.
daylightdies.com
This was actually a huge debate.....in 1988.
Posters, paintings, movies and books are all protected by the same copyrights and the general legal consensus is that intellectual property rights don't prevent the transfer of ownership of a physical product after it's initial purchase.
AudioGeekZine
arsehole know-it-all
multiple royalties are only paid for performance. Radio or otherwise.
The royalty was paid already.
The royalty was paid already.
Thanks for the replies, that makes sense. I think it's absurd but whatever.
BTW there's nothing intellectual about the music I've written.
BTW there's nothing intellectual about the music I've written.
jrt12
Member
slashvanyoung
Dopefish lives!
It's more a question of copyright than intellectual property (rights). "IPRs" can't be sold/alienated/transferred (might differ under some countries' laws) in the first place (this might not be completely true for the US, but in the EU, it's that way). But exploitation rights on intellectual property can be transferred. And that's what artists usually do, they transfer/sell their copyright (of certain recordings) to labels for some sort of compensation (i.e. royalties, advances etc.).
So when you're buying a record, you're buying the physical product and thereby you're gathering some exploitation rights connected to the content of THIS very product (the right to play the material under certain circumstances, i.e non-commercial, no broadcast etc. or the right to make backups for home use). This is YOUR right. So when you're reselling the record, you're reselling the physical product AND the rights attached to it. Again, those were YOUR rights. So, logically, all the proceedings from this sale are yours...
Intellectual property rights aren't affected in this process and therefore there is no need to compensate the artist.
I personally think European law is a bit clearer on this subject because of the clear distinction between intellectual property rights and the exploitation rights attached to intellectual property. In the US, it's all under the hood of "copyright", but if I'm not mistaken, the practical implementation has been pretty much the same on key points for some years now. Especially since the "Millennium Act"...
So when you're buying a record, you're buying the physical product and thereby you're gathering some exploitation rights connected to the content of THIS very product (the right to play the material under certain circumstances, i.e non-commercial, no broadcast etc. or the right to make backups for home use). This is YOUR right. So when you're reselling the record, you're reselling the physical product AND the rights attached to it. Again, those were YOUR rights. So, logically, all the proceedings from this sale are yours...
Intellectual property rights aren't affected in this process and therefore there is no need to compensate the artist.
I personally think European law is a bit clearer on this subject because of the clear distinction between intellectual property rights and the exploitation rights attached to intellectual property. In the US, it's all under the hood of "copyright", but if I'm not mistaken, the practical implementation has been pretty much the same on key points for some years now. Especially since the "Millennium Act"...
DanLights
Santa Hat Forever
This is a really good explanation, thanks.
Thing is, I buy damn near all my CDs used off Amazon because they are so fing cheap. It just doesn't make sense to me that the "artist" isn't getting paid for it.
But what you're saying is that when Joe Metalhead didn't like St. Anger and sold that shit to Amazon for like 10 cents, he also sold his right to listen to his burnt copy in the car. Right? Otherwise, conceivably he could just buy that CD, burn it, and give it away and...ah fukk....
slashvanyoung
Dopefish lives!
Exactly. And that's when it gets really weird, because you're still a legit owner of the burnt CD as a physical product but (theoretically) you don't have the right to listen to it anymore.
But if you're having a "close friend" or family member who also got this CD, than he or she would be allowed to give you a backup for home use. Theoretically this would have to be a newly burnt CD, because of the rights attached to a certain product, but practically it doesn't matter (since it's basically the same bit by bit). The amount of legit backup copies for home use hasn't been specified... but 7 is usually a reference number.
Now what's when the buyer of your CD is a "close friend" or family member? That's grey area. But theoretically it's legit... = even more
Another interesting point: If you own the LP-version of an album, you're not allowed to own a burnt CD copy or audio files of the CD version of that album. Only copies of your digitalized LP tracks... But again, if somebody close to you owns that album on CD...
IPRs/copyright simply rocks!
Moonlight_Seeker
Member
Moonlight_Seeker
Member
Well if those law makers are all on acid they should stop that and snort horse tranquilizers.
What if I sold the lighter I bought yesterday? Bic would not make a penny of course, but would I commit a crime if I lighted a cigarette with it? But I cannot duplicate a lighter. So what if I took an artwork like the Mona Lisa, are people allowed to take pics of her at the museum? Are they allowed to sell those pics? And if they do sell the pics to mister X, can mister X sell it to madam Y? And if yes does that mean that mister X cannot see the Mona Lisa ever after?
Meh, I'm hungry.
What if I sold the lighter I bought yesterday? Bic would not make a penny of course, but would I commit a crime if I lighted a cigarette with it? But I cannot duplicate a lighter. So what if I took an artwork like the Mona Lisa, are people allowed to take pics of her at the museum? Are they allowed to sell those pics? And if they do sell the pics to mister X, can mister X sell it to madam Y? And if yes does that mean that mister X cannot see the Mona Lisa ever after?
Meh, I'm hungry.
I haven't read all the posts in this, but I just wanna nominate that buying used CD's seems like a pretty dumb thing to do - let's face it, the ONLY reason I buy CD's is to support the bands, the people involved in the recording, and the scene, and buying a used CD gives money ONLY to the retailer, who I honestly don't lose too much sleep over!
I prefer to buy full-price CDs, but concerts and their merch booths are - to the best of my knowledge - better support for the bands themselves.
At the same time, the absence of a used-CD market might not do too well for new CDs, since a lot of people depend on the assumption that they can sell off two used CDs to buy one new one when considering a purchase. If these people didn't have used retailers to go through, they wouldn't buy quite as many new CDs - not being that type myself I can't say how much of an impact that would have, but it's worth keeping in mind.
Jeff
At the same time, the absence of a used-CD market might not do too well for new CDs, since a lot of people depend on the assumption that they can sell off two used CDs to buy one new one when considering a purchase. If these people didn't have used retailers to go through, they wouldn't buy quite as many new CDs - not being that type myself I can't say how much of an impact that would have, but it's worth keeping in mind.
Jeff
I see where you're coming from but used CDs come as .wav files, much better than mp3 as well as the booklet. Not to mention I can pop that fucker in the car stereo.
If bands were selling .wav files on their web sites for $0.25 each, i would buy an f load more albums and that money would go damn near straight to the band. This seems to be the best business model yet musicians don't seem to be buying into it so much.
Eh, most mp3 downloads (legal or illegal) I've found are high enough quality (meaning, at or above 192 kbps) that I can't tell a difference in quality, and I can always burn a CD!
DanLights
Santa Hat Forever
exactly, most bands selling albums or individual mp3's on itunes and amazon and such are high-quality stuff, really to say you can actually hear the difference from a 320 kbps mp3 to an actual cd audio file just makes you an elitist asshole haha
That actually seems like it'd be a REALLY good hearing test for mixing engineers...
Especially a track that THEY recorded and/or mixed. A/B the original studio master with a 320 kbps mp3 and see if they can pick up on it. Hell, why not throw in a blindfold just for naughty erotic fun...
I mean... to stop them from potentially seeing information that could trigger a response. Crap. Its a shame my backspace key is entirely missing.
Especially a track that THEY recorded and/or mixed. A/B the original studio master with a 320 kbps mp3 and see if they can pick up on it. Hell, why not throw in a blindfold just for naughty erotic fun...
I mean... to stop them from potentially seeing information that could trigger a response. Crap. Its a shame my backspace key is entirely missing.
Similar threads
