Ford, GM Sued Over Vehicles' Ability To Rip CD Music To Hard Drive

Lucas123 writes: The Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies is suing Ford and General Motors for millions of dollars over alleged copyrights infringement violations because their vehicles' CD players can rip music to infotainment center hard drives. The AARC claims in its filing (PDF) that the CD player's ability to copy music violates the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992. The Act protects against distributing digital audio recording devices whose primary purpose is to rip copyrighted material. For example, Ford's owner's manual explains, "Your mobile media navigation system has a Jukebox which allows you to save desired tracks or CDs to the hard drive for later access. The hard drive can store up to 10GB (164 hours; approximately 2,472 tracks) of music." The AARC wants $2,500 for each digital audio recording device installed in a vehicle, the amount it says should have been paid in royalties.

Time Shifting?

[pjh3000]

Time Shifting? Worked for the VCR.

Good luck with that.

[dfenstrate]

I'm sure GM and Ford have better lawyers, and I imagine they have more resources to throw at the affair as well. I also imagine that GM and Ford will team up for their defense, and make AARC cry. GM and Ford's lawyers signed off on the system before it was even developed, let alone installed in cars. The AARC is going to waste millions and go home with nothing.

The Alliance of Artists should lose this suit

[FudRucker]

they already bought the Music CD so the owner of these CD ripping automobiles are not stealing the music, and they are not capable of sharing those ripped CDs on the internet, it is just making it easier and safer for the driver because they can pay more attention to driving and not fumbling around with a CD collection while driving

Unbelievable

[tbannist]

I can't believe this idiocy is still going on. This seems to be clearly format shifting for personal use which should be entirely legal. I hope this lawsuit gets tossed out of court and the plaintiff is ordered to pay the defendants legal costs.

Re:Time Shifting?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Act protects against distributing digital audio recording devices whose primary purpose is to rip copyrighted material.

It should be pretty obvious that the primary purpose is not to rip copyrighted material.
A judge needs to slap AARC in the face for wasting everyones time.

Re:The Alliance of Artists should lose this suit

[Anonymous Coward]

Trying to link justice with logic? Good luck with that.

Re:The Alliance of Artists should lose this suit

[cHALiTO]

Sorry, what license? I didn't see any license in my CD. I bought a CD. With music on it. Music protected by Copyright Law, which states, mainly, that I can't redistribute that music without permission. Whether copying those tracks to a hard drive for convenience counts as redistribution, or some other fine print part of the law in question forbids it for some reason is debatable, but there's no "license" here. I haven't signed anything, nor even had anything given for reading.

Of course, IANAL, so/and I might be wrong :)

Re:Good luck with that.

[sycodon]

80% of the music in my iTunes came from CDs..."ripped" straight from the plastic. I an convert those all to MP3s.

So they should be suing Microsoft and Apple.

Re:The Alliance of Artists should lose this suit

[MitchDev]

You mean law, the American court system has NOTHING to do with Justice, hasn't for a LONG time...

Re:Time Shifting?

[Anonymous Coward]

What stops me from doing the exact same thing, but on a computer! (patent pending)