RIAA warns consumers of selling pre-loaded iPods | iLounge News

News

RIAA warns consumers of selling pre-loaded iPods

The Recording Industry Association of America is warning consumers that it is illegal to sell a used iPod that is pre-loaded with digital content. “Selling an iPod pre-loaded with music is no different than selling a DVD onto which you have burned your entire music collection,” the RIAA said in a statement to MTV News. “Either act is a clear violation of U.S. copyright law. The RIAA is monitoring this means of infringement. In short: seller beware.”

Andrew Bridges, a lawyer who specializes in copyright and trademark law, says the law is not so clear. “It really depends on the individual circumstances,” he explained. “I’m not sure the law is settled. If I’m a college student and I want to supplement my income by buying 100 iPods and taking my CD collection and putting it on those iPods and selling them at a significant premium, that’s probably not going to fly. But if I’ve had my iPod Shuffle for two years and I’m tired of it and I go out and buy a 60 gig video iPod and want to sell my old Shuffle, but don’t want to purge the music first, that’s probably legal.”

“There is very clear provision in the statute that says that if you are in possession of a copy that has been lawfully made, you can distribute that copy without violating the copyright holder’s copyright,” said Bridges. “That seems to suggest that there shouldn’t be a case against a casual user disposing of copies they made for personal use when one is getting rid of one’s own iPod.”

RIAA President Cary Sherman disagrees. “Unlawful reproduction or distribution is infringement.” he said. “There is no fair use when someone is getting a complete copy of a work, especially a creative work and especially when it could have an adverse impact on the marketplace for selling or licensing that work. When you buy a CD, you have it for personal use on your computer or iPod, but you can’t give it away and keep it for yourself. That’s having your cake and eating it too. If everyone did that, [record labels] would only sell one CD.”

« Mix: Swimsuit videos, Aussie death, Walkman phone, 7-Eleven

Sumo Tough Love Valentine contest ends tomorrow »

Related Stories

Comments

21

No, Johnny, see, as the leaders of said companies, they take the fall.
Have you never spent any time understanding the legal system and how these things work?
God.
Look at Enron and Tyco - they don’t haul the little guys in, they bring in the big dogs.

SB

Posted by Sb on February 13, 2006 at 9:14 PM (CST)

22

“Record companies don’t do that”

Have you ever spent any time understanding your own statements?

Posted by John on February 13, 2006 at 9:33 PM (CST)

23

I am not a big RIAA fan and really don’t want to give then any money.  Besides I am uncomfortable buying CD’s…they have been known to contain viruses…really it is not safe. 

It is much safer to download music from sites like Allofmp3.com where you can trust what you get.

Posted by Kyle on February 13, 2006 at 9:46 PM (CST)

24

Sorry to all the whiners, but doing this is actually legal. If the original copy you made was legal, then its legal to leave it on the ipod. You may not think it makes sense, but that is what copyright law says. No doubt the RIAA will buy some politicians and have it changed.

Posted by Countach on February 13, 2006 at 11:11 PM (CST)

25

This is silly. I’d hate to be an exec for the RIAA. They must sit around meetings all day and be like “what is the dumbest thing we can complain about.” If I was a record label I’d be ashamed to be a member of the RIAA… it’s like they’re constantly grasping at straws.

How are they going to monitor the selling of ipods? Are they God? That is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. 

The RIAA needs to embrace the consumer instead of push them away. They need some seious Dr. Phil. The reason for the music biz losing sales is not to piracy but they’re own irresponsibilty. Greed is the root of all evil.. RIAA will burn in hell.

Posted by Travis on February 13, 2006 at 11:34 PM (CST)

26

The riaa can bite me. I don’t even care about the legal issues any more, I’m just tried of their endless threats and scare tactics. Anyone see the story about them sueing some lady who didn’t even own/know how to use a computer? Sad.

Posted by jesse on February 14, 2006 at 1:23 AM (CST)

27

I mean, seriously, if the RIAA said 10 cents per song, or $5 a month unlimited legal downloads, I’d pay that. 

Now I won’t buy anything just to spite the RIAA. 

I absolutely feel zero guilt the more I hear about the RIAA b/c they are clearly only about greed.  They’re not about artists’ rights.  If they were, when all we had were CDs, artists would pocket more than 50cents to $1 of a $15 cd.

Posted by Mark on February 14, 2006 at 1:39 AM (CST)

28

“Besides I am uncomfortable buying CD’s…they have been known to contain viruses…really it is not safe. ” ...... are you serious?

“en all we had were CDs, artists would pocket more than 50cents to $1 of a $15 cd.” ..... more parties than just the artist and the riaa get money from sales of cds. theres the label, the publisher, the songwriting royalties etc. for people constantly putting down the artists for having so much money, pro-music stealing folks seem to think its ok that the artist gets such a small percentage of album sales… all the more reason to buy the albums and support them.

and what about the many artists who are signed to an riaa member record company that dont have their music on paying download sites like itms and napster? does that justify illegally downloading their music? not all artists are the rich high-life living people that are shown on mtv.. but the ipod is marketed largely with second rate artists popular by virtue of their image, so it isnt surprising that this attitude is not uncommon around here.

Posted by nick benko on February 14, 2006 at 2:00 AM (CST)

29

Oh come on people… HOW in the world are they going to monitor individual sellers to see if they sell iPods with songs on them? This is the most arrogant BS the RIAA has ever put out. They just want to scare the innocent gullible people out of doing it. But we all know they aren’t going to know about it unless the buyer goes to tell them. So until they institute a Copyright Police (think something along the lines of 1984 by Orwell) they’ll just have to sit there and take it up the tailpipe

Posted by Just me on February 14, 2006 at 4:31 AM (CST)

30

Oh… and one more thing… with the RIAA and any other big company for that matter - it’s not about volume for them. Because profits out of volume take a few seconds to come… and that’s not good for them. They want to sell less but with more money so the profit comes to them this nanosecond. I mean… really… the yacht isn’t going to pay for itself is it? or the penthouse in Central Park, right?
Stop dreaming about a fair music bussiness where everybody benefits. That’s never gonna happen. Those of us who want to be legal keep buying you’re cd’s. Those of us who want to be fair… we’ll keep taking what we want when we want. And our money will go straight to the artist trough concerts. :)

Posted by Just me on February 14, 2006 at 4:45 AM (CST)

31

And our money will go straight to the artist trough concerts

And so for every recording artist you have on your iPod and in your iTunes library, you go to see each of their concerts, right? Sure you do.

I’ve heard this reactive drivel from I don’t know how many of you who whine about the RIAA and scream about going to these artist’s concerts to see their money go directly to the artist.

Do you know how much a promoter takes out? Do you really know how much most artists get for that concert date? Have you PRICED the cost of going to a concert lately, particularly for any sort of established recording artist?

It makes buying the CD seem like the pittance it is. Your stealing isn’t about making some sort of grandious statement against the RIAA and their corporate puppetmasters, it’s because you’re too damn cheap to BUY the music to begin with.

And all of you thieves are right: it IS all about GREED…yours as well as the RIAA’s.

Posted by flatline response on February 14, 2006 at 7:26 AM (CST)

32

flatline response: And we’re damn proud of it… just like the RIAA is too LMAO

Posted by Just me on February 14, 2006 at 8:08 AM (CST)

33

very stupid by the RIAA.  they want to eat their cake and have it. This basically means I can’t sell music that I download from iTunes, however I can resell a cd I bought if I don’t want it anymore. Why should I be stuck with iTunes tracks if I don’t want them anymore. As long as I delete any copy from my hdd I’m not in the wrong.

Posted by moi on February 14, 2006 at 9:15 AM (CST)

34

Well, moi, you are wrong. As far as the copyright law goes, you can’t resell the music you bought. They say you can give it away and renounce usage of it when you do this, but reselling it is illegal. Or so they say. RIAA attorneys won’t aknowledge a paragraph in the law they are using and that makes any change of ownership of music tracks that does not give them money illegal. Many people say music ownership should always start with buying that music… and I agree (directed to flatline response)... but i’m just sick of all this. There is such a thing as common sense. For example, even if it is not available everywhere, iTunes had it right: cheap music for everyone so we wouldn’t steal anymore. But record companies want more and more and more and more. If they see us buying they will raise prices just because we’re their suckers. And then we won’t buy anymore and they cry out “stealing”. Well it’s only their fault. Common sense and respect of your customers goes a long way… and makes customers respect you back
And for the record: not making as much profit as you could doesn’t mean you are losing money. That’s what these greedy SOB’s won’t understand. It’s something we end users understand and accept everyday. Why should I let them be above me? I won’t and I consider myself equal to them and therefore I WILL NOT accept being abused by them. Because this is abuse, since music is a necesity in my life.

Posted by Just me on February 14, 2006 at 10:06 AM (CST)

35

I dislike the RIAA as much as the next person, but they are correct.

When you sell an iPod ( with or without songs on it ) you can NOT advertise the songs on the unit because that would mean you were profiting from the works of others.  It’s the same with used HD’s you can’t list the copyright’ed data or you are in violation of copyright.

The rule of thumb for RW media is that the sale price should be the same if it’s loaded with the latest new releases, random bits, or blank.  This way you are not making a profit from someone elses copyright.  This is why advertising a loaded iPod = illegal and selling a used 40gb HD is not ( as long as you don’t advertise what’s on it ).

RIAA IFAICT does not prevent you from reselling original CD’s or DVD’s as some people are implying.  Sure, they would like to prevent that, but the doctrine of first sale generally prevents that type of meddling.  You can’t sell copied music since that’s a clear violation of copyright.  You can’t resell iTunes music because of the contract you agreed to ( why anyone would buy music through iTunes boggles the mind ).

Posted by Eric on February 14, 2006 at 10:30 AM (CST)

36

Just me, just because music is a necessity in your life doesnt justify stealing it. that is like a smoker stealing a carton of smokes because they’re expensive and a necessity. or stealing groceries or anything else we ‘need’. great logic.

QUIT BEING A FUCKING CHEAPSKATE

Posted by nick benko on February 14, 2006 at 10:39 AM (CST)

37

I am not putting my fist in anyones mouth although I see that everyone who is a RIAA supporter does do this. I guess it comes with the territory… I respect your position on this and I agree with you. Totally. Music should be purchased legally. Noone is in the right when they take music they didn’t buy. But what we are talking about here is the fact that RIAA won’t even let you sell the media the music is on if the music is still there. They are saying you should delete it because it is an infringement of the law if the buyer gets the music for free (that is, even if you aren’t charging extra for it). That is why they are so much against peer-to-peer sharing networks. It’s not about being fair. It’s about them not making enough money to buy the new yacht this week. And whatever you say… that is not right. And it’s even more wrong than anyones music sharing, which contradicts their precious little laws.

Posted by Just me on February 14, 2006 at 11:28 AM (CST)

38

We’re all talking about the riaa here but what about apple?  Surely it must be illegal to re-sell an iPod.  This to me is all one big joke.  The RIAA is going about this in the completely wrong way.  They’re trying to fight a forest fire with a garden hose.  Things changed with the invention of napster in the mid 90’s and it took the recording industry till 2003 to try to get with the times (itunes music store).  Even this response is terrible.  It took the biggest force in the music industry (apple computer) to persuade the RIAA to do something other then sue it’s customers.  Trust me apple would sell the tracks on itunes for far less if the RIAA would let them.  Apple doesn’t make any money on the tracks they sell on itunes.  Almost all of it goes to the RIAA.  The only reason itms exists is to trap people into buying more iPods in the future by locking them into the fair-play drm.  To understand what’s actually going on one needs the facts.  The recording industry and apple, wants to have it’s cake and eat it too.  There are no sources for this but i’m sure the RIAA makes more of a margin off itunes than cd sales.  All they have to do is record the track and give it to apple.  Apple then sells the track for the RIAA and makes no money but locks its customer into a lifetime of iPods (which has over a 25% profit margin).  With all that said the RIAA and this DRM model’s days are numbered.  We are venturing into a whole new world of media distribution.  What the RIAA and companies like Apple need to do is get together and learn how to adapt and survive.  The ITMS is the first feeble steps.  In 15 years there will be no such thing as a record store or a cd.  People will live a completely digital life style and at the push of a button be able to access every song ever written and every movie ever made.  What needs to happen is we need an intergration of hardware software media and isp.  Take a look for example at the cable companies intergrating tv broadband and phone service all on one line.  Or aol time warner streaming videos and music to their customers free of charge.  Things are changing and the RIAA is dragging its feet.  Steal music go ahead because the RIAA needs to change it’s ways and get with the program.  Imagine the libraries in this country suing their patrons because they accessed an article on the internet and printed it out five times instead of once.  Or even charging $.99 a webpage.  Right now they are just trying to milk as much profit out of this model as possible before they have to change.  It’s all about money don’t be fooled.  This is not about what’s right and what’s wrong.  The RIAA can’t give us that definition.  It’s about them making money and us not wanting to spend it if we don’t have to.  People are used to getting stuff for free on the internet.  Nobody wants to pay for something they don’t have to and people don’t have to pay for music.

Posted by iPimp on February 14, 2006 at 1:03 PM (CST)

39

God.
This place has few intelligent people posting.
Do any of you “accountants” understand that for every Eminem, a label will carry 15 other artists that LOSE MONEY?
If you took the time to learn and understand this, you’d be able to breath as your head would begin to pull out of your a$$e$.
The RIAA wouldn’t have to do stupid things like this if the collective whole were honest - but we’re not, and this thread emphasizes it.

Bummed.

SB

Posted by SB on February 14, 2006 at 1:25 PM (CST)

40

bottom line:  push all music to digital download.  selling CD’s is fastly becoming an antiquated medium begging for the sweet release of death, as is the RIAA.

Posted by smiling skull on February 14, 2006 at 3:10 PM (CST)

Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy