Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Copying Music
I'm gonna post this in Music as well cause it covers both topics. Am i right in saying that if you purchase a cd you are legally entitled to make one copy for your own personal use in case the original is lost or stolen? What (if this i true) are the implications of changing the format, i.e. if i own it on cassette can i change the format to cd and claim that one as a copy of the original?
Thx
Thx
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by neg213. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Copyright has been enshrined in Common Law since 1709, but became statutory with the passing of the Copyright Act 1911. The current act is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This grants the creators of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works, sound recordings, broadcasts, films and typographical arrangement of published editions, rights to control the ways in which their material may be used. These rights cover; broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public. In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work.
Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibit a degree of labour, skill or judgement. Work that expresses an idea may be protected, but the idea behind it may not be able to be protected.
The duration of copyright on musical works is 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies. If the author is unknown, copyright will last for 70 years from end of the calendar year in which the work was created, although if it is made available to the public during that time, (by publication, authorised performance, broadcast, exhibition, etc.), then the duration will be 70 years from the end of the year that the work was first made available.
Only the owner of the copyright, or their exclusive licensee can bring proceedings in the courts.
... continued in next post
Copyright is an automatic right and arises whenever an individual or company creates a work. To qualify, a work should be regarded as original, and exhibit a degree of labour, skill or judgement. Work that expresses an idea may be protected, but the idea behind it may not be able to be protected.
The duration of copyright on musical works is 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies. If the author is unknown, copyright will last for 70 years from end of the calendar year in which the work was created, although if it is made available to the public during that time, (by publication, authorised performance, broadcast, exhibition, etc.), then the duration will be 70 years from the end of the year that the work was first made available.
Only the owner of the copyright, or their exclusive licensee can bring proceedings in the courts.
... continued in next post
... from last post
Copyright on a musical piece may be in several aspects; composition, printed score, performance, and recording. Each will have its own copyright. Consider "I'm a-Wailin'" written by Clog Blogford and Tricaeu Treet (composition) published in sheet music by Boozy & Hooks (printed score), performed by The Rumbling Underpants (joint and several performance) and that performance captured by Dodgy Discs (recording). You will infringe Dodgy Discs' copyright by copying their recording in any format whatsoever. You will infringe Boozy & Hooks' copyright by (for example) putting the words for public consumption on a Website. You will fall foul of the original composers if you perform their work in public without permission, and you will infringe The Rumbling Underpants' rights to their performance if you secretly made an alternative recording during the session at the Dodgy Discs recording studio.
Such infringements are thrust into the spotlight of the legal profession once someone starts to either make money from such activities, or to deny the legitimate copyright owners of their income from their work.
Copyright on a musical piece may be in several aspects; composition, printed score, performance, and recording. Each will have its own copyright. Consider "I'm a-Wailin'" written by Clog Blogford and Tricaeu Treet (composition) published in sheet music by Boozy & Hooks (printed score), performed by The Rumbling Underpants (joint and several performance) and that performance captured by Dodgy Discs (recording). You will infringe Dodgy Discs' copyright by copying their recording in any format whatsoever. You will infringe Boozy & Hooks' copyright by (for example) putting the words for public consumption on a Website. You will fall foul of the original composers if you perform their work in public without permission, and you will infringe The Rumbling Underpants' rights to their performance if you secretly made an alternative recording during the session at the Dodgy Discs recording studio.
Such infringements are thrust into the spotlight of the legal profession once someone starts to either make money from such activities, or to deny the legitimate copyright owners of their income from their work.
Neg213, you do not have a "justifiable answer" if you have copied lots or any of the cherished discs or tapes you possess. Let's consider what you actually own.
To keep it simple, let's say its an old fashioned vinyl long player. You have in your possession a piece of plastic, and should you wish to alter its shape, size, colour or other physical properties no-one could object. This plastic is the medium that conveys a performance. You do not in any way own that performance. Not a single note, not a millisecond of sound is yours. You are, however granted the privilege of listening to it, and provided it is within a reasonable domestic setting enjoying that listening pleasure with others, but not if that involves broadcasting, copying or hiring.
So you want to keep your collection up to date and make CD discs from those old records. Who is gaining profit, and who is being denied profit by this activity? Firstly you are gaining a more modern medium and are paying for blank discs, some of your time and a bit of electricity. This is a lot less than the shop price, so you have profited by the copying. The record company, who already thought of this need for CD re-issues, sell these old gems (we presume) on the new CD medium, thus gaining a revenue stream for themselves and all concerned with the performance. So, secondly, all the copyright owners are being denied all of their income from each illegal copying. The Copyright Act says that you should go to the shops and buy the new CDs from the record company. The same is true of "security copies" to cover for originals stolen or damaged. All concerned are being denied their rightful income in replacing the record.
Much as it may seem foreign and ludicrous, you do not own any part of the recording, you only own the medium. Your purchase price has gone to pay the writers, publishers, performers and recording makers for entertaining you.
To keep it simple, let's say its an old fashioned vinyl long player. You have in your possession a piece of plastic, and should you wish to alter its shape, size, colour or other physical properties no-one could object. This plastic is the medium that conveys a performance. You do not in any way own that performance. Not a single note, not a millisecond of sound is yours. You are, however granted the privilege of listening to it, and provided it is within a reasonable domestic setting enjoying that listening pleasure with others, but not if that involves broadcasting, copying or hiring.
So you want to keep your collection up to date and make CD discs from those old records. Who is gaining profit, and who is being denied profit by this activity? Firstly you are gaining a more modern medium and are paying for blank discs, some of your time and a bit of electricity. This is a lot less than the shop price, so you have profited by the copying. The record company, who already thought of this need for CD re-issues, sell these old gems (we presume) on the new CD medium, thus gaining a revenue stream for themselves and all concerned with the performance. So, secondly, all the copyright owners are being denied all of their income from each illegal copying. The Copyright Act says that you should go to the shops and buy the new CDs from the record company. The same is true of "security copies" to cover for originals stolen or damaged. All concerned are being denied their rightful income in replacing the record.
Much as it may seem foreign and ludicrous, you do not own any part of the recording, you only own the medium. Your purchase price has gone to pay the writers, publishers, performers and recording makers for entertaining you.
1 to 8 of 8
Latest Posts
So The President & Foreign Minister...
News2 mins ago
Crosswords5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
ChatterBank17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
