Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:27:46 -0500, in you wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >> Does that mean makin MP3 versions and copying a CD
> >> using CD-ROM recordable drives is, strictly speaking,
> >> illegal?
>
> THE MAN, Mr. Woudenburg, writes:
The title is kind Steve, but I'm just another list poster, really!
> >Yes, it would seem so (CD-ROM recorders are not AHRA compliant).
>
> That's not my take. In my view (though the point is arguable), home
> recording in America was legal before the AHRA, is legal during the
> AHRA, and will be legal after the AHRA. The ammended AHRA was an
> unconscionable bribe from congress to the recording industry to make
> them stop interfering with technological progress by threatening to
> sue every manufacturer who wanted to sell a consumer-grade digital
> recorder in the U.S. Before the amended AHRA, almost no one would
> sell a consumer grade digital recorder in the U.S. for fear of
> lawsuits from the recording industry.
>
> The reasons home recording is legal in the U.S. are very deep rooted
> and go way, way beyond the AHRA. Unless you have an extremely
> compelling reason (for example, child pornography), you do not tell an
> American what he can and cannot record in his own home. In my view,
> that's the big picture.
Your point is a good one. What would happen if a non-commercial home
recording case using *non-compliant* equipment (e.g. computer CD-R
drive) came before the courts? The AHRA does not protect this
practice, but would the courts still find it illegal?
I don't know, but I wasn't trying to answer that question, I was
thinking in the narrower context of the AHRA alone. For the sake of
settling this matter though, I'd like to stick with non-commercial
home MD recording/trading in the US and its status w.r.t. the AHRA and
US copyright law.
Regards,
Rick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
