KVR Audio

Shane Sanders · Post by **Shane Sanders** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:52 am

I own the vinyl LP of Morton Subotnick's "Wild Bull". It's pristine except the cardboard is scuffed around the edges, so basically I own a great recording of it. However, I don't own a record player, nor do I want to waste time or any money tracking down someone who does and then spending time getting my LP into digital format so that I can actually experience it again.

Is is "wrong" or illegal for me to seek out an MP3 of this recording and experience that? If so, why?

I haven't acted on this yet as I genuinely want to do the right thing. But it seems more stupid and against the spirit of having actually purchased the music once than to have to buy it again in another format (not that it's even available as far as I know).

edit: apparently it has been re-released on CD

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:07 am

I'm no expert but I think as long as you have purchased a legitimate vesion you have already paid for the licensing fee that was a part of the album's cost. There are certain "fair usage" laws that allow you to make copies, for your personal use, in other recording mediums.

On a side note, one of the things that pisses me off to no end, is how the RIAA cries foul whenever people trade mp3s on P2P systems, yet they have never offered consumers a rebate when they buy CDs of music they already owned in LP/Cassette format. Technically you have already paid for the license to listen to this music, in the original medium that you purchased it in, so you shouldn't have to pay for it a second time.

I am very, very curious as to what portion of a CD's cost goes to the licensing fee.

funkadil · Post by **funkadil** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:12 am

The process of downloading it is probably illegal and if you were to continue sharing it yes. After that there is nothing legally or morally wrong with keeping a compressed digital recording of something you own. I guess it depends on if youn think it is bad to support a p2p that shares illegal music. Thats my thought.

Wine · Post by **Wine** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:41 am

What funkadil is saying is probably correct. The legal issue as such is that the copy you download would not be taken from the one you own and it is therefore arguable that the fair use provisions would not apply. On the other hand if you own it (and download it) who could ever prove beyond a reasonable doubt (if you were charged criminally) that you did not make such a recording from your own legally acquired original.

Michael

james0tucson · Post by **james0tucson** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 6:10 am

funkadil wrote:The process of downloading it is probably illegal

*distributing* the recording is possibly an infringement of copyright, and could engender civil actions against the person responsible for distributing the material, but possessing it is not, nor is listening to it.

dystonia_ek · Post by **dystonia_ek** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:12 pm

I think that if a recording is out of print, there's not many other options.

In my sector of the underground, what with tiny runs of often just a handful of copies (typically less than a hundred), most artists encourage the spreading of their out-of-print work by any means possible.

Cabinfever · Post by **Cabinfever** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:25 pm

you paid money for a record. you got the record. now because you have not got a record player you think you should get something else for free ?

you can tap dance all you like about "rights", but in the end you just bought a record, not an entitlement for a free reissue of its music on every and any future format that may glide over the earth.

robenestobenz · Post by **robenestobenz** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:41 pm

Cabinfever wrote:you paid money for a record. you got the record. now because you have not got a record player you think you should get something else for free ?

you can tap dance all you like about "rights", but in the end you just bought a record, not an entitlement for a free reissue of its music on every and any future format that may glide over the earth.

If you follow this argument to its conclusion, we'd lose a lot of old music. An unsavoury option, I think.

Shane Sanders · Post by **Shane Sanders** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:43 pm

Cabinfever wrote:you paid money for a record. you got the record. now because you have not got a record player you think you should get something else for free ?

you can tap dance all you like about "rights", but in the end you just bought a record, not an entitlement for a free reissue of its music on every and any future format that may glide over the earth.

I don't actually have a solidly formed opinion at this point, hence the phish for advice. Some folks like to think an issue through before they start tap dancing. lol

But I think I bought a recording that happened to be distributed on acetate and the law may recognize this. If it does not, then I won't be snagging an mp3 of it. Case closed.

duncanparsons · Post by **duncanparsons** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:03 pm

funkadil wrote:The process of downloading it is probably illegal and if you were to continue sharing it yes. After that there is nothing legally or morally wrong with keeping a compressed digital recording of something you own. I guess it depends on if youn think it is bad to support a p2p that shares illegal music. Thats my thought.

The napster trial had as part of it's final verdict that:
Downloading copywritten music over the internet [note small 'i' meaning http, ftp, p2p, finger (if you can get it to work!),etc] involves NO VIOLATION of any rights. However, offering copywritten music for download without a proper license to distribute DOES VIOLATE copyright legislation in all countries who care for such things.

Hopefully that clears it all up

Basically, the courts couldn't rule that downloading was an offence, since it would have gross implications for public networking in general - if copywritten music can't be downloaded, then what about images, text, etc: since online newspapers are full of copywritten content, it would mean that viewing it (implying a download) would be a violation of the newspapers intellectual property. It would have been a quagmire - so the judge(s) wisely ruled against the distributors rather than the users. [I'll stay away from internet porn here..]

In your case, Shane, I don't know how a download service will respond when you approach them for MP3s and say 'Oh, RIAA said I could have them for nothing since I've already got the vinyl'. If they said 'er.. OK', then by all means, give us their address, since my 800+ vinyl collection could do with a little updating

For the sheer enjoyment, I think it might be worth tracking down a turntable and preamp, and firing up your favourite audio editor..

OTW, tho' I think you'll probably have to shell out whatever the site's rate is when you find the MP3s, no matter whether you had it on LP, cassete, 8Track or wax cylinder..

DSP

Shane Sanders · Post by **Shane Sanders** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:15 pm

@duncanparsons

Thanks for that info. Although just troubling myself with recording my LP will be my last resort, I am starting to think this morning that simply checking it out of the library via inter-libary loan in the USA might be a legal option for me. Then I could just rip it myself, having not involved any individual other than myself. Still gotta figure out whether I've purchases a license to the music or a mechanical object, though. lol

help me with my dumb legal question