What's the ethics of this?

[OlderThanWillie]

I'd like to hear some opinions on this: #I get a CD from my local library, bring it home and find that I really like it. Can I, ethically, copy that CD for my personal use?

Or, my girlfriend and I, being short on $$$, go together and purchase a CD. Can I, having paid for half of the cost, ethically copy the (complete) CD for my personal use?

[Tom C]

"I get a CD from my local library, bring it home and find that I really like it. Can I, ethically, copy that CD for my personal use?"
- No but it could help to determine if you liked the CD enough to buy.

I do not think looking for a loop hole like this is ethical. You can say your copying it to back it up in case the orig gets damaged -which may be ethical but that's not your reason or how you would use it. You want a free copy. I say no.

[Tom C]

But then again, bluegrass needs more recognition. If you copy it for somebody new to the music and they like it, They may end up buying alot more from the performers.
Still not legal though.

[grsnovi]

Ethically, I think that if you want to be able to buy recorded music from artists you should pay for your recordings.

Legally I believe that copying the library's CD is illegal.

I don't believe that buying one item and sharing the cost allows the two of you to individual copies.

I do think that the "music business" needs to get a grip on the $17 cost of a new CD vs the next to nothing cost of blank CD's and virtually cost-free duplication afforded by computers and inter-net downloads.

[Moose]

This thread is far toooo "heavy" for my input or observations. Whatever your decision(s),.. good luck folks http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif (My only legal "concern" here, is gettin' busted for using this 'puter for non-work related "business"..hee.. hee..). "Moose-the-academic-person"

[WV Mike]

Here's my 2 cents and I concur that it's illegal to copy CDs from the library.

I check-out lots of CDs and practice videos from our library. #They have a good selection of Bluegrass and Old Time stuff. #The attendant told me that if I like this stuff, I need to keep checking it out from time to time. #Otherwise, it gets pitched in a couple of years. #So, I keep checking them out and giving suggestions for new ones. #This way you can help support the demand for BG and OT music.

Mike

[Russ(String-Alley)]

the coolest thing is these old vinyl discs that they throw out. there is a ton of great stuff in the dumpster everyday. It's a shame I tell you! but a great source of free tunes, some will even give them away if you call and ask for any "out dated media"

cheers all

[Tom C]

You had to bring up Vinyl. What if you already had recording on Vinyl? Now you have to buy them again to have it on CD? and pay $17 for 42(at the most) minutes of music. They should sell re-issued albums for 1/2 price at he most. All the hardwork is done. And what if those performers are dead. Why should somebody else get the money? I guess I can heep going but......

[jiffyfeet]

I think as a musician that anything you can do to avoid giving any money to any record company associated with the RIAA is the best ethical decision you can make. Every CD you copy instead of purchase means less money they will have to sue their customers in a misguided attempt to hold on to a doomed business model that hurts all professional musicians.

[Michael H Geimer]

" if I like this stuff, I need to keep checking it out from time to time. #Otherwise, it gets pitched in a couple of years. #"

That's an interesting observation ... if you copied those CD, you'd likely never check them out again. Sure you'd have your copy, but maybe the library pitched the public copy due to a 'lack of interest'.

Also, I think I agree with Gary above, that this overall public dialog is centering on the pirates, rather than on the inflated cost of CDs themselves. CDs are drastically cheaper to manufacture than LPs, so why do they cost so much more at retail? Something smells fishy to me. I just have a hard time believing that the promotional costs of skyrocketed in the 80's, right when CDs came out. (Now, I can believe that the cost savings from lowered manufacturing costs might have been shifted over into promotion, but there is a big difference - IMHO)

Copying those CDs might #not be legal, but I won't be the one to turn you in. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

- Benig

[J. Mark Lane]

It is illegal in both examples. It is, imo, also unethical in both examples.

Mark

[MartinD_GibsonA]

>>Every CD you copy instead of purchase means less money they will have to sue their customers in a misguided attempt to hold on to a doomed business model that hurts all professional musicians.<<

Jiffyfeet -- But what if the CD wasn't put out by one of the big RIAA companies, as my trio's wasn't? #We did it ourselves at a local studio. #Would you make an exception and tell someone they should *copy* the record company's CD but *buy* ours as we're just small-time local artists? #If you would, then you're saying that it's OK to cheat the big-name artist with a record contract but it's not OK to cheat the little guy trying to do it himself. #The truth is that cheating EITHER ONE is wrong! #I agree that when you plunk down $18 for a CD, it's likely the artist sees a nickel of it. #But cheating the artist out of even that nickel to spite the record company isn't the right thing to do. #If you think it is, then you need to take a hard look at your own ethical principles.

Don Smith

[MartinD_GibsonA]

OlderThanWillie,

Both cases you cited are illegal AND unethical! #In the first, you're copying something that belongs to someone else (in this case, the library). #In the second, you're getting a whole CD for the cost of half a CD. #Taken to its extreme, why not get 36 people to kick in $0.50 each for an $18 CD and make 35 copies of it? #I think you'd agree that's wrong. #Making only one copy rather than 35 doesn't change the principle one iota; it only changes how much cheating is going on.

Don Smith

[danmills]

I agree with many of those who have answered already, i.e. that the scenarios described by the original poster involve copying that is both illegal and unethical. I would also like to respectfully disagree with those who would promote illegal copying as an ethical method to help erode the power of the RIAA in the recorded music industry. I think this approach "throws the baby out with the bath water," because I believe it hurts the artists both in the short run and in the long run.

In the short run, the artists are denied compensation, however meager it may be. In the long run, the artists suffer from the general erosion of ethical habits on the part of current and future generations of consumers. In other words, we and our children could all get very used to getting our music for free, and become that much less likely to respect any future business models that might come along, even those that may grant the artists a fairer share of revenues than the RIAA does today.

So the question remains, what can one do now that both supports artists and undermines the recording industry establishment? Personally, I try to buy CDs directly from the artist whenever possible, either at live appearances or from their websites if possible. I believe the artist gets a greater share of these revenues. I also like to support independent artist-owned labels by buying their products.

And finally, I like to support new business models if it appears they may better compensate the artist (even if it's only a marginal improvement), #or if they offer better support for the way today's consumers use recorded music. For example, I think Apple's iTunes Music Store is worth supporting. I don't know whether they've done much (anything?) to expand the artist's slice of the pie, but they do at least grant the customer reasonable rights to listen to their product on multiple devices.

Cheers,
Dan (who has no affiliation with Apple, but I used to work in another industry where artist's got screwed out of their royalties by unlawful copying by consumers)

[Big Joe]

While I understand the frustration of paying so much for a CD, the cost is not the plastic or the duplicating costs. It is the cost of the artist and recording that was done. They get paid by selling product and if they don't sell it because someone is copying it, they cannot afford to make recordings. In the end, taking a product that is not yours...by copying or other means....without permission...is theft. If you can sleep at night knowing you are stealing the food off anothers table then the issue is so far out of hand to allow a discussion like this to be effective to anyone.

[pickinpox]

I fully agree with the above posts that say it is both illegal and unethical to copy music simply for saving the cost of a CD. #More food for thought. #I (and most of you too) go to see many of the artists who record their music and sell cd's for a living. #I plan to see many more in the future. #Most are friendly and know many of their fans by name. #How could I look them in the eye after cheating them out of money they rightfully deserve? Even if this were not the case...wrong is still wrong!

OTW, I'm glad you brought this subject up. Thinking out loud somtimes is a good thing.

[Rayce]

YARRRR MATEY!!!

[Nik-chick]

Speaking as someone who has had a couple college courses in recording industry, as well as having grown up around the industry (my father is a former DJ who's done both local and satalite radio, a songwriter and a musician and I've grown up around all of that and the people in his fields), not to mention the fact that the 12.5 hrs a week I am able to work around school is selling CDs and that I am currently enrolled in Mass Media Law this semester, you are fixing to get yourselves a lecture here. The other side of the picture:

First of all, how many people live in your town? Take that number and divide the number of CDs in your library by it. This is what you actually own. Tho you legally cannot copy anything, I believe that you will find the third note in the 8th measure of the second song on a Yani CD is yours and nothing else in that library's media room is (if you were to divide the assets equally amoung all citizens). Ethically, you may copy that one note. I believe it's a G#. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Seriously, copying cannot be done legally in those examples. However, it can be done. If you own something, personally (just you), and you want to make one more copy for personal use, I believe that is legal. Atleast, it is if I understood my Survey of Music Buisness professor correctly. For example, Tom has those albums on vinyl. If he doesn't have a record player, he can copy those to CD (there are people who do that for you) as long as he only USES ONE copy of the recording. He has legally purchased that ONE copy.

However, if two people buy a recording togather, they may only take turns using it. For example, my father and I went halfsies on a Kathy Mattea CD. It's in his stereo as we speak. I do not have a separate copy, therefor I cannot listen to it until the next time I take it away from him. We share ONE legal copy instead of making a second illegal one. This was because I couldn't afford the whole thing, and he took pity on me (He probably would have given me my own had I asked). This might be a good idea for you and your girlfriend.

It is so sad that what Jiffy said is such a common opinion. Especially since it's typically held only by those who are the most ignorant to how the recording industry works. You may be the exception to that rule; I don't know. But anyway, here's the other side of that. (http://www.geocities.com/strongheart_7/RIM.htm)

That is very long (slightly longer than this post) which is why I didn't post it here. It's roughly written, but I have to get to class. I might come back and clean it up a bit later.

[craig]

not sure i see what the debate is here. #yes, CDs seem outrageously priced when you compare the price of a blank CD with one you purchase. #but, you aren't buying a CD for the jewel-case, paper and CD it's printed on. #you buying the music. #the artists have signed contract with the company that produced the CD. #the law says it's illegal to copy it. #that's pretty clear, right? #so, there's no debate whether it's illegal. #furthermore, anything illegal is unethical, no?

(please don't take this as a self-righteous flame. #i've broken the speed limit plenty of times and burned plenty of CDs.)

[Peakbagr]

If you bought an LP, you paid for the rights to that music for your own use. If you see the same music on a CD, I would have no problem copying the CD which duplicates the LP. If the law disagrees, than its a case of the law not keeping up with technology. You paid for the rights to listen to that music, you are simply using a better way of duplicating it for your own use.

[AspiringLuthier]

As a general rule, if you have to ask if something is ethical, then you probably already know the answer and are just looking for justification to do what you know you shouldn't. CD's are overpriced, but don't forget that not only does the price of the cd pay for the materials cost, the ridiculously small portion that the artists gets, and profits for everyone along the line, but it also has to cover the production costs for all the other CD's that don't sell enough copies to pay for themselves. For every CD that sells a million copies, there's a warehouse full that only sold a few. The sad fact is that when I make a bad decision, I have to pay for my mistake, and when a record company executive makes one, I still have to pay for it. Funny how that works.

[J. Mark Lane]

I'm always amazed at people who think that because something is overpriced it's OK to steal it.

I would also add that, in general, the amendment to the Copyright Act that allowed end users to make a copy for their own use was, and is, a good thing. The fact that so many people want to twist and abuse that hard-fought provision to justify all kinds of additional copying (and stealing) is playing right into the hands of the very "industry giants" that you claim to be so opposed to.

The fights going on in Congress right now are huge, and relate to all aspects of the music industry. Every single thing that relates to end user copying is being challenged... harder than ever (and it has always been challenged). I picture a bunch of industry lobbiests printing out statements like some of the above to hand around in Congress to prove that the ability to copy CD's should be eliminated. Thanks, folks. You're doing a great job... for the RIAA.

Mark

[Walter Newton]

From what I understand a major label artist with a GOOD contract makes about $1 on the CD you pay $18 for...most less. I agree that the situation above is technically unethical; however the sooner we get to the point where we can pay the artist a few bucks directly for the music we want (downloading it over the internet, for example), the better for both sides...in the meantime don't expect the record companies to go down without a fight.

[Walter Newton]

Also a quick point for craig - illegal acts are not automatically unethical. (Think Civil Rights movement, for example.)

[mandolooter]

I'll be offering free coping of my CD to be released in 2069 for those interested...

OK jokes aside it's not a question of ethics if I take a CD I bought and paid for and make myself fifty copies for my own use so the original doesn't get messed up getting thrown around the car, at work ,etc. #The problem comes when I give one to my friend...so I don't. #It's pretty easy and if I want to burn music there is 1000's of hours of free downloads available in most every genre that has been authorized by the bands/musicians and the search for what I like is part of the fun. #Lots of great "discoveries" along the way too!http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/blues.gif

[Brookside]

I was going to say the same, Walter. I don't always look to the law for ethics. In my opinion they don't always run parallel.

I've heard before that artist make their money by touring, not by CD sales. I'm not sure how accurate that is. I am sure that the top artists make a bundle touring but I would guess that more of them are just trying to break even. I did a (very) little bit of concert promoting some years ago. I recall that we booked Delbert McClinton for $10,000. He flew in from Nashville with his nine piece band. They played and went home. I personally don't see how Delbert could have made any real money to speak of. There are a lot more touring musicians playing 1000 seats or less than there are Rolling Stones or Brittany Spears types. They must be making money somewhere, and they surely do deserve to.

I do not agree with free downloading of music or copying of another CD. If I object to a CD price I will simply do without it. These days you can listen to a sample of many tracks by many artists before you buy. If it speaks to you, plop that money down.

[Nik-chick]

Peakbagr: No one ever said otherwise about copying your own LPs. I gave that as an example of where it IS legal. (And Tom didn't have someone to copy it, he just said those CDs should be cheaper.) Sorry if I was unclear.

[PhilGE]

Take a listen to ths tune by Nancy White as recorded by Fink and Marxer. Copy the link into a RealAudio Player... The tune is "And I Copied It". (http://www.npr.org/dmg/dmg.php?prgCode=ME&showDate=06-Feb-2004&segNum=7&NPRMediaPref=RM)

http://www.npr.org/dmg....Pref=RM (http://www.npr.org/dmg/dmg.php?prgCode=ME&showDate=06-Feb-2004&segNum=7&NPRMediaPref=RM)

-Phil

[LeftCoastMark]

My stringband sells lots of CD's at live performances, and I always encourage people to bootleg them freely. Making the music brings me joy, knowing it's out there being enjoyed also gives me joy. The more the merrier.

How's the old zen proverb go.....Attachment is the source of all suffering.

And, I just don't buy CD's anymore. There's just too much good stuff available as free mp3 (legal) downloads, etc.

The recording industry/companies are dinosaurs.

[grsnovi]

I will often buy multiple copies of small, self-produced artists and give them out as presents - to spread the music.

Inevitably, the discussion gets around to how expensive it is for a Sony or BMG to "develop" and support a new artist until they "make back" their investment.

I think its a bunch of balogna! I see very little in the way of music being targeted at me. If the recording companies didn't have to do mini-sex-shows (aka: video) to "sell" an act, maybe they could produce 10x the number of acts?

When I was a kid, we bought 45's - there were new ones every week. Major recording artists released LP's every six months!

The problem with the industry is not a lack of talent - they've gotten wrapped up in their own mess and can't see the forest for the trees any more.

For an up-and-coming artist, there are TONS of essentially free outlets that allow download and hype of original music.

Whining that the downloaders are the cause of the problem and not a sympton is nonsense.

[jiffyfeet]

Ok, ok. I have to say, I was only mostly serious with my post. In truth I am well aware it's unethical to go to the library with your laptop and copy CDs. I also believe downloading is wrong.

As much as I hate the idiot record companies, I realize they aren't just sitting around on their thumbs collecting checks. They are at least as important to the process as the artist, as without them it is next to impossible to sell millions of CDs.

However, ten years ago the average band had no choice but to record in a pro studio, whereas today they can afford to do most everything themselves if they're at all intelligent and motivated. I would prefer to give someone $10 for an album they made themselves and maybe had professionally mastered, than give the record companies $20 because they spent $50 million on BS marketing garbage.

I don't buy CDs at all anymore, except about three in the last several years. (The latest was Thile & Marshall http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mandosmiley.gif ) I do buy CDs at shows I go to, and shirts too if they have anything good. I don't lose any sleep at night having downloaded some songs either, although I do keep this to a minimum. Honestly I don't spend lot of time listening to recorded music except on the radio. I'd rather play my own. Also, I don't even know where there is a library around here. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Just thought I better say something so as not to leave you all thinking I am some Rage Against the Machine type trying to take down corporate America. Mostly I am just trying to boycott the recording industry as it exists today.

Finally, and sorry to be so long winded, it is absolutely untrue that illegal=unethical. If anyone honestly believes that, they should think about it for a minute. A quick look back to legal slavery might make you think otherwise.

[crawdad]

What steams me is the overall price of CD's. Several majors came out and said that they will be lowering the prices significantly on all their CD's. It is still not reflected in the marketplace.

Another thing that kills me is the whole catalog scam. In the 60's, I bought "Bringin' It All Back Home" by Bob Dylan for $2.54 at a local Ben Franklin store. Its been a Columbia catalog seller for almost 40 years. Every time the price of recordings goes up, the price of this title goes up too. Now, they have "remastered" the album again, and its even more expensive than it ever was.

By now, I'd venture to guess that the producer, artist, musicians, engineers and A&R people have all been paid. Actually, that probably happened within a year of the albums release. Ever since then, this item has been free and easy money for Columbia. I'm sure Dylan still gets his mechanicals and songwriters royalties. So they repackage all the stuff into greatest hits, remasters and definitive collections and box sets ad nauseum. All it proves to me is that record companies are greedy bastards. C'mon--catalog albums? They could sell them for half price and still make a lot of money.

The consumers will never really revolt and they know it. We are too busy to bother. So this practice continues and will until customers stop paying the high price. Personally, I dig the Apple iTunes store. You can pretty much get any album for ten bucks or make your own compilations without paying for the songs you don't care for. Some discs you can get for 50 cents a song. Fair to me. I don't feel so gouged. I'll pay 99 cents a song for songs I really like. The RIAA gave itself a black eye with the legal suits. Too many greedy businessmen trying to pay for those multi-million dollar homes and yachts. Give the people a fair price and a great product and you will sell a ton of records.

[Dolamon]

Ethics - Morality ... recording business. Seems like a few oxymorons floating around with those words. As a person who has seen his work performed and not gotten paid for it (more than once), it hurts #financially, emotionally and artistically. It sucks big time.

That said, I do copy music ... a lot of it for friends, but have limited myself to Music which is virtually unobtainable. That's not only on vinyl and euro press items, but some nifty collectors pieces which I literally spent years trying to find a copy. Those I share. And, if I can find a performer or obvious heir of the performer, I'll send five bucks off as a thank you. That doesn't sound like much money but if thirty or fifty people send these older players some money, it adds up - fast. Is it ethical to copy? I don't know ... perhaps it's in the spirit of the copier rather than the intent. Is it moral? Well - if your dealing with patent law and copyrights and finally Harry Fox and company, morality never enters into it. I do my best to subvert those mean spirited bean counters every step I take.

And that's a fact Jack!

[hellindc]

Artists get 8 cents per song from CDs produced by the big companies. (I'm taking the stat from the following URL: http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html) That's a whopping 96 cents for a typical CD.

I'm skeptical as well about how much of the price is in production, how much in "promotion." I'm not necessarily saying that it's ok to copy CDs freely. I'm an author and have problably lost a few thousand dollars to those who copy books. But I think the owners of these megacorporate entertainment companies are also theives.

I'll tell you this much -- I don't feel we have any moral obligation to respect the extended copyrights that Disney and the boys got from Congress a few years ago. Steal Mickey! Walt died a long time ago.

We need a copywrite system that guarantees reasonable compensation to musicians and the people who do the work of producing and distributing recorded music. We don't have that. We have a system that protects the "property" of those who couldn't play a G chord in open tuning.

[Greenmando]

When I borrow a cd from a friend I make sure to copy it to disc so I do not damage his in my cd player.
If you were to damage a cd from the library and replace it, would you have the right to copy it before you replace it.

I have never understood the sign - "private property stay out!" " property of U.S. Government" # if the U.S. owns property does it not belong to me as well? # http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[mandoJeremy]

I'll add the same thing here as I did on your newest post:]

Dude, just copy it and don't worry about it. #I would guess that 85 to 90% of the people on this board have copied a CD or 2, 3, or 20. #Just posting the question is the part that is not so wise. #I would bet that most of the people who responded on your last post have copied their fair share. #See ya.

[J. Mark Lane]

Dude, just copy it and don't worry about it. #I would guess that 85 to 90% of the people on this board have copied a CD or 2, 3, or 20. #
I would guess that you are wrong. I can only speak for myself, but I have NEVER done it.

As for other comments here, lots of good stuff said.

First, of course ethics and the law are not the same thing. No one ever said they were. That's pretty basic. That's why there's two different concepts. And yes, at times they do diverge... the entire concept of civil disobedience, ala Emerson, Thoreau, etc., is based on that notion, and nothing is more American than civil disobedience. As I said, however, imo the conduct inquired about is BOTH illegal and unethical.

On the whole question of copying etc., I couldn't agree more with those who say: focus more on the music that is made available without restrictions, and on the small self-produced artists. Like Gary, I buy multiples of CD's from these folks and give them as gifts. Turns new people on to great music, and it's fun, and it supports the artists. I couldn't care less about 95% of what is produced by the Major Labels, and I can live wihout the remaining 5%. I have some great CD's by people who participate on this Board and other groups I follow.

If more people took this path (and more are), then the simple forces of the marketplace would change the power structure of the music industry. And that will happen. One of the great ironies of modern life... the advances in technology made possible by the large corporate entities will end up undermining their very position at the top of our society. Hah! We win anyway, in the long run.

But that doesn't change my view on the initial question asked above.

Mark

[mandoJeremy]

I personally have never went to the library and copied CD's myself but if a buddy comes over and wants me to learn a song I will burn a copy of his CD.

[ethanopia]

If you want to hear a meaningful debate on the subject chek this out
it is an mp3 of the oral arguments in the recent grokster case...
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/20040203_oral_arg.mp3

while not specifically about Copying Cds it makes the inflamatory language used by some seem rediculous and the arguments of taking food off artists table a seem little out of hand.

The same arguments about the destruction of the Movie business were made during the begining phases of VHS and Betta Max, we all know that pirates put the movie makeers out of business right...

So lets not write off new technology yet, it's just that the big companies haven't figured out how to make money off of it yet, but they will don't worry.

[craig]

walter,

i see your point. #that's not really how i meant it. #i don't turn to the law for my ethical principals. #but, my own personal ethics are that i should obey the law. #therefore, breaking the law is unethical. i would imagine most follow that line.

furthering that thought, if a law didn't coincide with my basic ethical priniciples, it would be my responsibility to do what i can to change that (i.e. voting, petitioning, etc.) #so far, i've been pretty lucky i guess.