RIAA chief says ripping okay, Sony BMG lawyer "misspoke" during Jammie Thomas trial
By Nilay Patel 
posted Jan 4th 2008 6:59PM
posted Jan 4th 2008 6:59PM
Now that the furor has died down over the Washington Post's questionable piece about the RIAA supposedly suing Jeffrey Howell for ripping CDs, it's time to hear what the RIAA actually has to say -- and it's surprisingly sensible. Speaking to NPR, RIAA president Cary Sherman flatly said "the story is just wrong." Sherman went on to say that the RIAA hasn't ever prosecuted anyone for ripping or copying for personal use, and that the only issue in the Jeffrey Howell case was -- as always -- sharing files on Kazaa. Perhaps most interestingly, Sherman directly addressed the "ripping is just a nice way of saying 'steals one copy'" comment made by Sony BMG's anti-piracy counsel in the Jammie Thomas case, saying that the attorney "misspoke," and that neither Sony BMG or the RIAA agreed with that position.Of course, it wasn't all sunshine and cupcakes -- Sherman refused to straight-up answer the question of whether or not ripping was legal, saying instead that "there are 100 hypotheticals" and that "copyright law is very complicated." Of course, what he's really saying is that courts haven't made an clear determination of fair use regarding ripping and that he's covering the industry's collective ass -- which explains his hilariously out-of-touch explanation that making copies onto "analog cassettes, special audio CD-Rs, minidiscs, and digital tapes" is legal, because those are all expressly allowed by law. On the other hand, Sherman also said that RIAA's interpretation of the law "doesn't really matter," because "not a single claim has ever been brought over personal use -- [the Washington Post story is] really unfortunate, it's misleading consumers, and it's simply not true." It's a fascinating interview, and it's more than worth a listen if you've got any interest at all in copyright issues -- regardless of what side you're on.
F^#K the RIAA!
FTRIAA!
FTRIAA!
Any questions?
"Perhaps most interestingly, [RIAA president man said] that the "ripping is just a nice way of saying 'steals one copy'" comment made...[was because the] attorney "misspoke," and that neither Sony BMG or the RIAA agreed with that position."
Of course! No one is saying you can't copy your own CDs! Our lawyers misspoke!...unless you happen to be on the wrong end of our legal department with no hope of publicity to save you. Then we mean it. Now, would you like to pay us $20,000 now, or would you like to go to court in another state and pay $40,000 to prove your innocence?
I'm confused! I pulled out my old The Moody Blues Greatest Hits CD. I didn't see anything on the disk or the package about a license. So the CD (or the content) is not really licensed. There is a copyright notice and all rights reserved comment. Since PolyGram reserves all rights, does that mean I do not have the right to play the CD in my CD player?
And what about the license? I thought a license was a legal agreement between two parties on the rights to use some content / information. I also thought licenses required specifying time period for the right to use the content. If there was no license agreement that I acknowledged and accepted then is there really a license contract for my Moody Blues CD.
So what is CD content: licensed and copyrighted or just copyrighted?
Rip It, Rip It Good
I think it is less important to discuss whether or not he thinks it is illegal, because that is a legal determination for the courts not a record executive. The question should have been, "do you think it is fair for a customer of yours who legally purchased a CD from you to rip the songs to a device of their choice?" or, "do you think it is fair for a customer to make a back up copy of a CD they have legally purchased for their own use in the advent the original gets destroyed?" At this point they are beginning to talk to talk, but I'm curious if it is just a facade put up to get the topic to die down while they fight in back rooms to change the status quot or if they have truly changed their minds with respect to fair use.
Exactly RIGHT. However, there is more to it.
Cary Sherman AKA RIAA Hitman Numero Uno - "copyright law is very complicated"
It's NOT complicated. My belief is that copyright law is no different then any other forms of contract law. There is some sort of licensing agreement between the consumer and content provider, and the content providers have refused to clearly define it from the start. They rely on copyright law to entirely define their agreements with the consumer. It CAN'T. It should only be a foundation on which to construct a legal license agreement with 2 parties. Don't think one exists? "Unauthorized Use" is perfect evidence that a license agreement DOES exist. Copyright law merely "supplements" it. Their "license agreement" basically states they reserve all of their rights, while defining NONE of yours. It's been a legal mess ever since. Fair Use is NOT a right, it is merely a set of legal litmus tests to see whether or not somebody could reasonably believe that a content provider was harmed from a consumer's actions. Ohhh.... and that ALSO implies a license agreement existed between 2 parties.
The wrong questions were asked and to the WRONG PEOPLE. It is no surprise that he refused to be clear and candid about the real position of the content providers, which are his clients, with respect to their own agreements with the consumers.
He's a lawyer. Jean Giraudoux - "There is no better way of exercising the imagination than the study of law. No poet ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer interprets the truth"
His answer, when read between the lines, is nothing more then reserving his right as a lawyer to say whatever is necessary in a court of law at the moment to win the case. He basically agreed that copyright laws exist, that they are complicated, and that it takes a lawyer as good as he is to understand them :)
I cringed when Ms. Thomas spewed out that bombshell on the stand under oath. She DOES represent Sony's interests. She stated, on behalf of her client, that "ripping" a CD was considered a violation of license agreement (which is vague and undefined at best) and copyright law. That was in a court of law. One could reasonably expect that to be Sony's ACTUAL position with respect to their intellectual property. For those that possess rights under a licensing agreement, meaning anybody that has bought a CD from them, that is extremely concerning AND infuriating.
The RIAA and Ms. Thomas are not actually at fault. Yes, I did just say that. Everybody seems to want to throw their hatred towards the RIAA, and that is SAD. The RIAA is just a bunch of LAWYERS. They get PAID to say unbelievable statements on a daily basis. They can say ANYTHING. It only matters what a JUDGE rules (which creates precedence). That is their nature. They could go home and think their clients are idiots, but they will come back to the office in the morning and continue to defend the position of their CLIENT.
It is a very sad fact of life in the US that "justice" is often given to those that are merely more powerful. One of the drawbacks of a capitalist state. I am not promoting communism, so don't start with me on that. I am just saying you have to recognize that it may be a negative side effect of capitalism. I have learned that ANY position can be argued in our courts. It is only HOW well you argue a position, NOT whether or not the position itself is ultimately held correct legally, ethically, morally, etc. You have a lawfirm with a couple hundred million dollars in the bank they can bankrupt a small business SOLELY BASED ON FINANCES. How fair is that?
So don't go after the lawyers, they are like COCKROACHES. We need to get angry where it MATTERS. Let your wallet send the message to Sony, EMI, etc. It's the board of directors at Sony where all of the anger needs to be directed.
So STOP saying "FUCK THE RIAA" and START saying "FUCK SONY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
NO DRM FTW!!!
I can't believe the epic fail that the press pulled on this story. There's a bunch of nuance to it, and the RIAA didn't just randomly send up a press release saying "Format shifting no longer fair use! See you in court!" However, the press did their best to make it sound that way.
I think the gist of their claim was that the fair use argument was forefeit when the person put the copies into a shared folder. Maybe there's more to it than that, I don't know, I'm not an investigative journalist. However, I didn't hear any journalists explaining it, they were too busy frothing at the mouth and hyped to be getting eyeballs on their story. Fail fail fail. If all you care about is eyeballs, photoshop up some Lohan/Spears lesbian porn and give up on trying to get people to listen to what you're saying.
In the end it's not such a bad thing, I trust the press less (and the torches-and-pitchforks mobs online A LOT LESS) and it's always good to get a sanity check about how reliable your sources are.
I agree with you 100%, and there's a reason Engadget hired a copyright attorney -- as soon as I saw our original piece sourcing WaPo I posted a clarification:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/30/riaa-not-suing-over-cd-ripping-still-kinda-being-jerks-about-it/
That said, this doesn't have anything at all do with fair use, since Howell hasn't raised that defense -- the RIAA has always maintained that putting any copyrighted MP3s in Kazaa shared folder is infringing behavior. The new thing here is the introduction of the "unauthorized copy" language, which does raise some interesting questions. Still, I think Sherman said mostly all the right things in this interview -- he seems a little less hysterical than Hilary Rosen.
You made a mistake in thinking the press could print the truth or that they somehow failed to report it here. The press has nothing to do with truth.
The press, like lawers, politicians and the RIAA, sucks.
Yeah, it's like posting somewhere "Blue ray kicks HD-DVD ass all the time".
It's just sensationalism. Of course there would be a million people picking up pitch forks and torches.
It wasn't the RIAA that said anything in the first place. Just some idiot hired counsel for Sony that let her mouth get away from her on the stand.
Which sounded better? Non-RIAA attorney says something stupid in court, or RIAA SAYS YOU CAN'T RIP CDS!!!!
It's hard to get your facts straight from what you get on the news. If you are really going to be informed about it, you almost have to read all the filings themselves. Which I certainly don't want to do. Engadget gathers a lot of this from other sources, so I can't place the blame entirely on them.
The RIAA and DRM will die out eventually. Not because they are wrong on any particular level, but only because it is becoming less profitable for the industry. It will just take some time.
i really can't agree with lumping the RIAA with the press, lawyers, and politicians. whatever their faults and failings, the last 3 items are required for the proper functioning of a democratic society, whereas industry lobbyists do nothing except undermine the proper functioning of a democratic society. it's a whole different level of suckitude.
Anyway, sensationalism or not in it (many of us doubted about the story), the truth is that sooner or later somebody will tell you that ripping is ilegal (the haven't won that battle yet, but I am sure they are looking at ways to do it). These guys have many faces, you know.
What I hope is that CD will be dead for good before that happens, and at least they will have to find a better argument than the encoding bullshit.
Just FYI, in other countries (i.e. SPAIN), these RIAA equivalents have lobbied the goverment to introduce a law in which they put a fixed fee/tax in every sale of a big number of consumer electronics (meaning, most of things that can play audio/video, or even the ones to record or prepare a copy, ta-da... even printers). And this is to fight piracy?
Well, you tell me, but it is fun to think that people is paying in advance for the right to be pirates, even those that are not thinking about "stealing" anything. Men, u like it, don't you?
Hey now! I rip my CDs to "analog cassettes" all the time.
when I first read "misspoke" I thought of a poorly aimed poke...glad the article cleared that one up for me haha.
HOLY SHIT! won't this thing go away?
Anyone that gets sued should just plead bit guilty, and represent themselves. RIAA will be bankrupt, the courts will be full with frivolous lunacy with people representing themselves talking for hours about miniscule details.
If you didn't get sued, but still want people to know what RIAA is doing, slap a "YOUR MUSIC HAS BEEN REPOSSESSED BY THE RIAA" flyer on EVERY CAR YOU CAN FIND with the tag line reading "We are located at 1025 F ST N.W., 10th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20004. You can contact us at 202/775-0101."
OR Give your congressman, senator, whatever, a $1 and say stop the RIAA lawsuits!
You have to fight dollars with dollars - or dollars with fire and brimstone.
I highly doubt too many are willing to do that because so far the RIAA is 1-0 in cases taken to court.
1-0 over how many letters they sent out?
how long did ONE case take?
are there going to be judges rubber stamping convictions all of a sudden?
I hope we still have due process in the legal system
The only way to stop the RIAA is to boycott the industry.
The RIAA needs some good old fashion analog consumer backlash.
so basically, "we still have the right and capability to sue you back to the stone ages"
makes me feel all warm and fuzzy
what a douche...
Who still uses kazaa?
I was wondering the same thing.
Are the only cases out there against Kazaa users? Have they ever prosecuted bitorrent users?
RIAA are bastards. they deserve to burn.
Seriously , i think I should buy some crappy CD the kids today listen to, rip it and copy onto 30+ CDs and leave 'em everywhere. Schools. Library. Malls. Grocery.
Bastards.
Whose most popular with the college kids?
whoever the tabloids are forthing about the most :]
whoever the tabloids are frothing about the most :]
Well, it seems they're still:
Really
Insecure
And
Anal
So, nothing new there.
Why does every thing that comes out of the RIAA's mouth sound like BS?
attn: engadget webmaster
pls add a print command to your website!
pls do NOT use javascript to do so! ... just basic ccs3/xhtml2.
thanx.