Hi Kent, I think your understanding is incorrect (I've been wrong in the past before though... ;).
I wasn't able to get directly to the RIAA's website, because it appears to be down, must be anther of the DOA attacks that have been going against their websites. I ended up having to resort to the Wayback Machine at http://www.archive.org to get an older display of their pages. >From my understanding, it doesn't matter whether you profit from the record or not (one can't give away illegal items in America besides selling them) that you are liable for breaking the Copyright laws. http://web.archive.org/web/20020924131524/www.riaa.org/Copyright-Laws-2.cfm U.S. Copyright Law {Title 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq., Title 18 U.S.C. Section 2319} Federal law protects copyright owners from the unauthorized reproduction, adaptation, performance, display or distribution of copyright protected works. Penalties for copyright infringement differ in civil and criminal cases. Civil remedies are generally available for any act of infringement without regard to the intention or knowledge of the defendant, or harm to the copyright owner. Criminal penalties are available for intentional acts undertaken for purposes of "commercial advantage" or "private financial gain." "Private financial gain" includes the possibility of financial loss to the copyright holder as well as traditional "gain" by the defendant. Where the infringing activity is for commercial advantage or private financial gain, sound recording infringements can be punishable by up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Repeat offenders can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. Violators can also be held civilly liable for actual damages, lost profits, or statutory damages up to $150,000 per work. The Federal Anti-Bootleg Statute {18 USC 2319A} prohibits the unauthorized recording, manufacture, distribution, or trafficking in sound recordings or videos of artists' live musical performances. Violators can be punished with up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. With that said, let's hope that Theo doesn't get 5 years.... Cheers, Dave > I don't think this is technically correct. My understanding is that if you > sample a work without authorization, the copyright holder can seize any > profits from the sale of your infringing work, and destroy any remaining > unsold stock. > > On records that are limited editions of 500, given the cost of cutting, > plating, and pressing, your maximum profit would only be 500 to 1000 > dollars. > The RIAA's lawyers don't get out of bed and their their morning piss for > $1000, so I sincerely doubt anyone's going to sue Theo any time soon. > > On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, David Bate wrote: >> Well, you have to remember, that with every Copyright violation that >> Theo >> makes with Ugly Edits, he's risking $100,000 - $250,000 fine's per >> infraction from the RIAA, so in reality, he's not charging enough to >> cover >> his butt, as I doubt he's paying royalties on these. >> > >
