Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Your Rights Online Technology

Audio Format Shifting To Be OK'd In New Zealand 327

Posted by timothy from the sorry-folks-just-some-common-sense-nothing-to-see dept.
Bloodrage writes "The New Zealand government is about to define a small part of the rights assumed by the 'fair use' clause in the Copyright Act 1994. Essentially they are going to protect the consumers' rights to convert media from one format to another for personal use, making it clearly legal to transfer tracks from a commercial CD to a mix-CD, MP3 player, PDA, PC, 8-track, or tuned array of hummingbirds. NZ law already makes it clear that gifting or reselling items includes a transfer all of rights, including copyright, warantee, and licencing agreements, so providing your original is the genuine article you're not a criminal. An article in the The Dominion Post gives an outline of the responses from the recording industry and why the government is considering it. It boils down to; this is 'fair use' and don't argue, and that the government can't see how the alternative could be (affordably) enforced."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Audio Format Shifting To Be OK'd In New Zealand More

Audio Format Shifting To Be OK'd In New Zealand

Comments Filter:

  • Good on them.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mcbridematt ( 544099 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:46AM (#8642728) Homepage Journal
    ..now if the fricking Howard government across the tasman, I would be very grateful.

    • Re:Good on them.. (Score:2, Informative)

      by mcbridematt ( 544099 )
      that should read 'across the tasman could do the same' :(

    • it won't happen (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Howard is a fucking idiot. Vote latham!
    • They are too deeply in the pocket of big business and our 'most important ally' to do anything like protect the rights of their own citizens.

      If the govt. won't act to rescue its own citizens from a cage in Guantanamo Bay where they are being held and tortured illegally in contravention of all international law precedent, we can't really expect them to care about our right to use things we legally own in ways we see fit, can we?

      Additionally, there is a push by big business in Australia for the 'harmonisati

  • Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by metallicagoaltender ( 187235 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:48AM (#8642743) Homepage
    Legally I know why it is, but realistically, what's the problem?

    I have a large CD collection, and like to keep digital versions of some CDs I listen to frequently on my hard drive (never shared), or burn CDs to carry around with me so I don't have to worry about theft/damage/loss to the original. Why could that even be a problem? Sure, people can pirate, but people are going to find a way to pirate regardless.

    Maybe I'm missing the logic of recording execs, but how is pissing consumers off by limiting their rights going to encourage them to buy more CDs?

    • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by zagmar ( 20261 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:02AM (#8642795)
      The one valid concern I can see is this, and it's a doozy if you are a record exec.

      If the fair use clause is interpreted as a purchase of the rights to personal use of copyrighted material without concern for the physical form, it could allow a precedent in which the natural degradation of the storage media is grounds for forcing the producer to replace it. Eg, you buy a CD, after several years it develops holes in the recording layer. You go to the company that produced the CD, and they have to replace it, because they are technically breaking the implicit agreement that was made when you bought the CD, that you have the right to personal use of the recorded material. Imagine the record companies shelling out billions to replace CDs because of natural deterioration.

      • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by timmyf2371 ( 586051 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:15AM (#8642838)
        I've seen this done before, albeit in the Software Industry.

        I once bought a computer game, which had an offer in the manual which went along the lines of:
        If your CD is lost/damaged then you can obtain a replacement for the cost of postage/packaging + obviously a small fee to cover the cost of producing the CD.

      • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by fpga_guy ( 753888 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:31AM (#8642910)
        Your "error" is to assume reasonableness on the part of the record company.

        The reasonable approach would be to pay a media-replacement fee, say $2 or so.

        The really tricky problem is about the obsolescence of media. Let's say I bought "Dark Side of the Moon" on CD a few years ago. Now it's been re-released as an SACD with a stunning 5.1 surround mix etc etc. Have i bought the rights to "Dark Side of the Moon" as an entity, or just as a particular instance?

        • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Eythian ( 552130 ) <robinNO@SPAMkallisti.net.nz> on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:58AM (#8643013) Homepage
          Have i bought the rights to "Dark Side of the Moon" as an entity, or just as a particular instance?

          It would be fairly easy, and somewhat reasonable, to argue that you have bought the rights to the non-SACD CD version only, as there is talent (and significant man-hours) going into the production of the extra enhancements in the SACD version that aren't in the other version.

          • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            And we don't want everyone to start scratching thier CDs just to get it replaced by the SACD version, do we? ;)
        • Great choice in music. I have the Mobile Sound Fidelity Labs LP pressing. I agree on buying the same thing over and over again. Where can I exchange my LP's, 8 Track and Cassette tapes for CD's for a nominal replacement media fee?
        • you've bought the right to that particular issue of the soundtrack. If you can derive lossy or exact duplicates of it, then you should be allowed to, as the essence of what you have got is the same. You don't have the right to the new stunning 5.1 surround mix, as you haven't actually paid for that. That would be my assumption anyway ...
          • you've bought the right to that particular issue of the soundtrack. If you can derive lossy or exact duplicates of it, then you should be allowed to, as the essence of what you have got is the same. You don't have the right to the new stunning 5.1 surround mix, as you haven't actually paid for that. That would be my assumption anyway ...

            I agree... so how about the reverse, I go out and buy the SACD version. Do I now have the right to walk into a record shop (or to the publisher's HQ) and say "here's m

      • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ortholattice ( 175065 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @05:08AM (#8643211)
        The one valid concern I can see is this, and it's a doozy if you are a record exec...
        You go to the company that produced the CD, and they have to replace it, because they are technically breaking the implicit agreement that was made when you bought the CD, that you have the right to personal use of the recorded material. Imagine the record companies shelling out billions to replace CDs because of natural deterioration.

        Have you seen those TV commercials offering ginzu knives or whatever with a lifetime warranty? The knives are actually cheaply made. When one goes bad you can send it in and have it replaced FREE, plus a "modest shipping and handling charge" of $6.95 for a knife that might cost $0.50 to make. Their "lifetime warranty" has just turned into perpetual guaranteed income for them. The only requirement in a scheme like this is that the item be cheap to produce. You can do the math for CDs.

        • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:4, Funny)

          by wings ( 27310 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @09:24AM (#8644314) Homepage
          ...you can send it in and have it replaced FREE, plus a "modest shipping and handling charge" ...

          <sarcasam>
          They already have that method in place. Shipping is FREE, and you don't even have to send in your original.
          You just go down to the local CD store and pay the modest $19.95 'handling charge' when you pick out your replacement.
          If the model you want is obsolete, or no longer in stock, you can choose a replacement of 'equal or greater value'.
          </sarcasam>
      • imagine the record companies shelling out billions to replace CDs because of natural deterioration.

        Even in the unlikely event of this becoming law, they'd be able to charge a "reasonable" charge to cover duplication, shipping, handling, etc. Pay at least $5 per disk, do paperwork, and you'd have to return your old one. So not a lot of people would bother.

      • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by cthugha ( 185672 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @05:43AM (#8643307)

        You are not properly constructing the "right" as it is described. The NZ government is considering creating an exemption to the copyright regime such that it is not an infringement of copyright to format-shift for personal use. In other words, you do not gain a "right" enforceable against the record companies, they lose their right to insist that you not format-shift, and you gain a corresponding liberty to do so according to your own desires.

        To offer an analogy: the fair use exemption that allows copying for educational purposes would, according to your reasoning, confer a right on the public to demand that the record companies provide educational material and services related to the works in respect of which they own the copyright.

        I hope that's clear. :)

    • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by 88Seconds ( 242800 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:10AM (#8642815)
      FWIW here in NZ there is no 'fair use' clause allowing people to make copies for their own use. So in effect anyone who does rip any tracks from any CDs they happen to own is breaking the law. The record company execs are worried that by allowing some form of copying the floodgates will be opened.
      In the article, Micheal Glading, the MD of Sony NZ mentions that he is opposed to the move.

      Paradoxically, Sony NZ sell MiniDisc players here in NZ and also sell the blank MiniDiscs. No doubt, if you were to visit one of their retail outlets and enquire as to what you could use them for, you would probably be told by their reps that you can use them to copy CDs (I might even give it a go tomorrow).

      The law here in NZ is an ass, because it is perfectly legal to buy devices for playback of ripped cds and also legal to buy the software for ripping cds.
    • ...how is pissing consumers off by limiting their rights going to encourage them to buy more CDs?

      Because the recording industry execs and marketing droids are a shower of arrogant little dickheads with absolutely no clue of what the consumer wants.

      If the Kiwis can get this so right, WTF can't the Oz govmnt? Who bought them out, and for how much?

      The best cure for seasickness is to go and sit under a tree. [Spike Milligan]

      • If the Kiwis can get this so right, WTF can't the Oz govmnt? Who bought them out, and for how much?

        They aren't...at least, not really. One copy only for personal use is pretty restrictive. The article referred to is pretty sketchy, but it seems that a number of details haven't been considered. What happens if the one copy you're allowed to make is damaged or destroyed? Why shouldn't you be allowed to make as many copies as you like for personal use (one copy for the car, one purely for backup, one for a

    • It shouldn't be a problem... not "logically". Their logic, if you can call it that, seems to be "if we allow people to copy their own CDs for themselves, they'll think it's alright to copy them period."

      I wonder if customers(*) will even notice. I'm not in NZ, but nobody here seems to give a damn. They don't know their rights, they don't know what's "fair use" and many likely haven't heard of copy-protected CDs or the local equivalent of the DMCA or whatever other funny corporate-mandated everyday freedom

    • Don't know about anyone else, but I find it a metric shit-load easier to bring my computer to university -complete with CDs ripped to .mp3 & .ogg on my hard drive- than 200+ CDs.

      The execs are just little chicken littles, crying that the sky is falling in, just like they did when taping music off the radio was about to kill the record industry...remember?

    • Re:Why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Technician ( 215283 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:17AM (#8643066)
      They did miss a point. They did point out that more blank CD's are sold than audio recordings. In my case, that is easy to explain. I have a digital camera. Duh! My wife and I have cars. I don't carry a case of CD's with me when we change vehicles. I download and burn LEGAL public domain old radio programs (Fibber McGee and Molly, Amos and Andy, Great Gildersleeve, Lone Ranger, Abbott and Costello, and others). I put mixes of MP3's on CD's for the living room DVD player (juke box in a single tray) and portable CD/MP3 player. Somehow the record company thinks all these uses is piracy as I didn't bother to buy multiple copies or carry a huge CD binder everywhere I go. The marketing folks have missed the boat on this one by jumping to conclusions that may not be entirely correct by assuming a blank CD sale equals an unsold audio recording sale. That assumption is simply not true. I'm in my 40's now. I have a library of CD's. I also copy all the computer games to work copies as cheap insurance for the kids. All too often they are used as carpet protectors under the wheels of the chair. I'm still finishing ripping my LP's and cassettes. (that's probably labled as piracy also) I definately bought more blank CD's than audio CD's last year by a factor of about 50:1. I don't have any P-P app installed. I'm on dial-up at home. CD's that don't back up properly get returned as defective. My burnt CD's get marked Work Copy with a listing of the location of the original.

      "Work Copy"
      "Original on file at..."

      I resent the implication I'm a pirate because I bought more blanks than I bought pre-recorded.

  • Aussies unite... (Score:4, Informative)

    by fpga_guy ( 753888 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:49AM (#8642748)
    and lobby for similar actions here. With the impending senate debate on the AUSFTA [dfat.gov.au], it's time to lobby your local reps and senators.

    With any luck, we'll be rid of Howard (US bootlicker [abc.net.au]) in November, so don't forget to speak to opposition MPs as well.

    • Re:Aussies unite... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by fpga_guy ( 753888 )
      I should have added, that the AUSFTA includes requirements that Australia implement DMCA-style anti-circumvention laws. So if it passes in its current form, you can effectively say goodbyte to format-shifting for encrypted media.

      An interest comment elsewhere that NZ forbits DVD region coding, and so they bloody should. Talk about doing nothing against piracy, and everything against fair use!

      • Re:Aussies unite... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Yorrike ( 322502 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:50AM (#8643158) Journal
        DVD region coding is not illegal, however, it is perfectly legal to buy/sell DVDs that are not Zone 4 (Austrailia and NZ), here in NZ, and players that are not regioned.

        For example, when I bought my DVD player, one of the selling points the guy in the store made was it was deregioned (chipped locally), and could play any and all DVDs. And it does : )

        One of the most popular DVD retailers here (Real Groovy), sells Zone 1 DVDs right next to the Zone 4 DVDs (though they are more expensive due to importing).

        In fact, one chain of video rental outlets was actually threatened by a local distrobutor for selling Zone 1 DVDs in store (not renting, that would be illegal), before the local boys had released the zone 4 distro. It's all linked to our parrallel inporting laws, which allow for such things.

        Odd that a former British colony has more freedom than the land of the free : )

    • Dammit, that's "Bush bootlicker", not "US bootlicker".

      Most of us up here in the US would like to see the architect of the War for Oil out as much as you'd like to see Howard out, if not more.

  • wow (Score:4, Insightful)

    by natex84 ( 706770 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:50AM (#8642753)
    a government finally showing some sense in the matter. i recently purchased several cd's from a favorite band of mine, ripped them, and the cd's now are nestled safe in my cd case. since i don't have a cd player at all (besides in my pc) the last thing i want to see is a cd that is not rippable. go NZ! :P

  • We have great laws here in NZ (Score:5, Funny)

    by walter_kovacs ( 763951 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:52AM (#8642762) Homepage Journal
    First legalized prostitution, and now this. ;-)

    • Flamebait? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by BiggerIsBetter ( 682164 )
      How about insightful? I'm not a big fan of our Police roading enforcement right now, but that aside, NZ is actually making laws that reflect the reality of the people. Prostitution ain't flash, but it's real, and legalising it means the girls get the same workers rights as anyone else. CD ripping is common place, and is considered "fair use" in the eyes of all outside the music sales industry boardrooms. These laws reflect the people's view, not some corporation's greed. I guess that's why it's news here on

      • Prostitution ain't flash, but it's real, and legalising it means the girls get the same workers rights as anyone else.

        Does that mean the same contracts as artists sign to the recording industry, then I'm not sure if it's a good thing.

      • These laws reflect the people's view, not some corporation's greed.

        You guys could do a great business exporting your government--you've got 6 billion potential customers waiting with bated breath.

    • We have legal brothels in Australia too!

    • NZ prostitutes (Score:5, Funny)

      by Rupert ( 28001 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @12:06PM (#8646213) Homepage Journal
      I have to say that the ones I saw in Auckland were quite beautiful and had very soft wool.

  • Don't Get Excited (Score:5, Funny)

    by tonyr60 ( 32153 ) * on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:57AM (#8642776)
    Before all you geeks get any ideas, NZ is a right crap place. The Govt is bloody awfull, the weather is terrible, and despite what you think you know, LOTR was actually made on the moon.

    We don't want any more to migrate here, the place is OK as it is.

  • Wisdom From Deep Down Under (Score:5, Insightful)

    by amigoro ( 761348 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:58AM (#8642779) Homepage Journal
    From the country that gave us LOTR and the All Blacks, comes something equally important: A piece of sensible legislation.

    There is a lesson to be learned here. There's no economic loss to record companies when people copy their own CDs to MP3s or some other digital format. However, it will cost the government millions to enforce a law that prevents that.

    Therefore, the sensible thing to do is, let the people copy their own music. As long as they don't pass it on illegitimately (which, actually happens even if you ban copying once own CDs), this should be a solution that makes both the companies, the people, and the the industry happy.

    It's high time other countries followed soot.

    Three cheers to the Kiwis!!!

    Moderate this comment
    Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
    Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]

  • New Zealand is Progressive (Score:5, Interesting)

    by oacis ( 212298 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @02:58AM (#8642780)
    New Zealand has always been surprisingly progressive when it come to technology (surprising because of the decisions of some other *cough* Australian *cough* governments, not because of anything else). DVD players with region codes are illegal in New Zealand - they see it as anti-competitive and trade restrictive.

    That's why I buy my stuff from NZ - the $AU coupled with the open trade agreement - no import tax - yay!
    • " New Zealand has always been surprisingly progressive when it come to technology (surprising because of the decisions of some other *cough* Australian *cough* governments"

      NZ has NO association with that land mass across the Tasman Sea populated by convicts.

      WTF do people from other parts of the world think we are part of Aus?

      • Re:New Zealand is Progressive (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:26AM (#8642881)
        WTF do people from other parts of the world think we are part of Aus?

        You're one of top two least corrupt nations on the planet, one of the top three on economic freedom, press freedom is high and you made the most successful film trilogy of all time. So we have to annoy you somehow...

      • I don't think they think you're part of Australia. Its more like the US and Canada - if the US introduced something like the DMCA but Canada didn't then that would be of interest because why should the US have introduced it if their neighbour hasn't, and doesn't that mean people can just shift across to Canada if they want to be free of it.
    • Region coding may not be illegal in Australia, but neither is regionfree-afying your equipment. I use DVD Region X on my PS2, my mother's DVD player just needed Pi entered in a specific way to go region free. Because of the ease with which this is achieved, many stores sell stuff from other regions. I bought the Region 1 Firefly box set in a city store last weekend.
    • Not sure about that, I don't think Region Coded DVD players are illegal. We have a region here (4) and most players are coded, I had to do unlock mine. This NZ government also restricted the importation of Non-region 4 DVD's into the country as NZ reps of the major studios where moaning that DVD shops in NZ were selling Region 1 DVD's of movies currently showing at the cinema.. This really irritated me, as there are lots of DVD's that aren't in Region 4, and the studios should get movies here sooner. It i
      • Hmm, is this recently? I haven't seen any region coded players here, they all seem to be multizone, even the $NZ100 ones. I think it's more a case of there not being any laws _against_ unlocking them, and there being no commercial incentive - customers don't want region coding and plenty of suppliers produce region free ones.
        • How could there ever be a law anywhere against unlocking your own DVD player? If it's your own property, you can do what the hell you like with it after you've bought and paid for it with money you earned by your own graft. Well ..... maybe in some kind of totalitarian state with no concept of private property, where the Government claims all ultimate rights on everything and merely deigns to falsely delegate them to its subjects ..... or if it was on hire purchase it might be reasonable to expect you n

  • Don't they trust us? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ahkitj ( 237143 )
    Come on, if we can be trusted to photocopy from books on an honour system with regards to how much we can copy for fair use, we can damn well be trusted to give ourselves one copy of an audio CD. And why stop at CDs?

    Of course there's going to be the fringe element, come on. Even with students (not like me) desperate enough to photocopy a whole sociology or -- heaven forbid -- a 600-page politics textbook on the New Zealand Parliament!

  • Kiwi (Score:5, Funny)

    by Viceice ( 462967 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:00AM (#8642792)
    ... or tuned array of hummingbirds.

    You mean, a tuned array of Kiwis?

  • This is what upsets me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by paramecio ( 750982 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:11AM (#8642820)
    "More blank CDs are now sold in New Zealand than pre-recorded discs."

    Shit, man! Main use for blank CDs is not music-and-video-piracy for many of us. I do backups, store my five-megapixel pictures and burn linux distros to give away to my friends! And I'm just avoid talking about hard disks...

    I feel sick! Stop this madness!

  • Sony NZ Hypocracy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by donnz ( 135658 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:12AM (#8642827) Homepage Journal
    Sony NZ managing director Michael Glading said he was totally opposed to the move, which he believed would "open the floodgates" to unrestricted piracy.

    This would be the same Sony NZ who have been selling MP3 players in New Zealand for many years now. How on earth did they expect their clients to find anything to play on these devices without breaking the law? I'd like to hear them give an answer to that.

  • Binding media ownership to licenses (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lightspawn ( 155347 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:13AM (#8642829) Homepage
    NZ law already makes it clear that gifting or reselling items includes a transfer all of rights, including copyright, warantee, and licencing agreements, so providing your original is the genuine article you're not a criminal.

    What if an actual criminal steals the genuine article? If my rights disappear because no longer own it, does it mean they get transferred to the criminal?

    What if the original article is destroyed? Does it matter how it happened?

    • Re:Binding media ownership to licenses (Score:4, Informative)

      by tonyr60 ( 32153 ) * on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:19AM (#8642855)
      "What if an actual criminal steals the genuine article? If my rights disappear because no longer own it, does it mean they get transferred to the criminal?"

      No, the NZ crimes act states that ownership of any property stays with the owner until it is legally assigned to some other entity. So even if a CD is stolen, the owner remains the legal licensee.

      • Re:Binding media ownership to licenses (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @07:21AM (#8643608) Homepage
        Disclaimer, I don't know squat about NZ law, but it's almost inconceivable that NZ law is different than just about every other country in the world on this...

        So even if a CD is stolen, the owner remains the legal licensee.

        No, you mean the owner remains the legal owner.

        You are not a licensee unless they have licenced you copy rights to manufacture more copies or for public performance or the like. Only rights get licenced, particular copies are always owned. There is no such thing as a licence to "use". You buy a book and you have every right to read it without any licence whatsoever. You buy a CD and you have every right to listen to it without any licence whatsoever.

        The copyright lobby is trying to totally redefine copyright to grant them rights over ordinary "use". They are doing a frightningly good job of convincing the public that copyright already says various things that they want it to say. When the public and the legislators believe that copyright already says what the industry wants it so say then it becomes easy for the industry to get laws passed making those changes because no one realizes it's a change. Hell, even when legislators do realize it's a change they think they are "fixing" a problem with the law because the law didn't say what they thought it was supposed to say. It's a very insidious tactic, and the media / publishing companies are the masters of manipulating perceptions.

        -

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:13AM (#8642831)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • The EU should have done this, so that Europe can unify their fair use provisions.

    It doesn't seem unreasonable that the EU could declare Format Shifting legal, Backups legal and so on, just as long as you still own the original.

    Its a mess right now, with everyday acts (like ripping CDs to MP3s) being copyright infringements in some countries but not others.

    Why should an everyday act, done by everyone, that has no financial impact on the copyright holder, be illegal? Because the BSA wants it to be?

    They co

    • Re:EU should have this (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ttsalo ( 126195 )
      Its a mess right now, with everyday acts (like ripping CDs to MP3s) being copyright infringements in some countries but not others.

      Where is it illegal? UK? They don't want to be a part of Europe anyway.

      In Finland you can legally make copies for your own use in any format even if you don't own the original. And crack any copy protection in the process if you need to. (EUCD implementation is still in the works here, like in the most of the EU.)

      --

  • "copycat kiosks" (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Eythian ( 552130 )

    Association chief executive Terence O'Neill-Joyce said it was preparing a submission against the proposal. "It's really about enforcement. How on earth are we going to stop things like copycat kiosks springing up around the country?"

    For a while, these were common, at least in the city I live in. Many of the larger dairies had them. They had the appropriate part of the copyright act printed on them, along with a note that they are not to be used for copyright violation, however they had bigger writing say

  • Woah, sorry Sony (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "At the end of the day, you're sending a message that it's okay to copy, and that is going to kill our business. It's taking away people's rights to earn a living, and that's horrendous."

    Oh my God, I never realised all the harm I was causing by copying tracks from my CDs onto my harddrive. Well, now that I realise, I'll never do it again.

    In what other ways have I been undermining the recording industry? I wonder if it's ok to copy CD tracks onto physical sound waves?

    One thing's for sure, I'm never goin

  • It's nice to see the NZ govt making some sensible laws for a change :)

    We/NZ have excellent consumer rights laws and this is a nice polishing touch :)

    Now if only they hadn't giving in to the movie industry and stopped parallel importing of DVDs (GRRRR)
    • Are you sure about this?

      You're not allowed to import the DVD of a film that is still playing in cinemas or yet to come out, but I reckon that's fair enough - especially given that we get unzoned DVD players.

      Go to the right place and you can get the brand new Rammstein DVD for cheaper than a CD costs (just one example), if there's a parallel importing restriction then it doesn't seem to be inflating prices too much.
  • The music industry says a government proposal legalising some CD piracy will kill its business.
    May be it's time for industry to be put out of misery and mecifully killed....

  • Copyright violation is a civil offense (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @03:54AM (#8643001)
    "providing your original is the genuine article you're not a criminal"

    Even if your original was copied from a mate, you'd still not be a criminal unless you were profiteering off the copying. Copyright infringement is a civil offense, not criminal in all but a handful of cases. As soon as people realise that copying music isn't a crime but an offense, they'll see that this whole thing has been pulled out of RIAA's ass and promptly blown out of all proportion to help their flagging bank balance.

    • Copyright infringement is a civil offense, not criminal in all but a handful of cases

      And this is one of the most disturbing trends that I see in the West at the moment. The (re)criminalisation of civil wrongs. It has been a long time since we abolished imprisonment for debt, but it seems that we are now accepting imprisonment for copyright infringement (where infringement means performing a copy that results in no financial loss to the copyright holder). This will lead (has led) us into a very dark p

  • From the art. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chris_sawtell ( 10326 ) * on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:15AM (#8643064) Journal
    "It's really about enforcement. How on earth are we going to stop things like copycat kiosks springing up around the country?"
    You're not. You are going to allow the production of recordable cds and either charge as if a wounded bull for the originals -- in effect the sheet music industry does this -- or you are going to set up licenced "copycat kiosks" where your customers can create music selections of their choice. If I was a recording industry executive I'd be jumping for joy because I no longer have to carry any manufacturing production costs whatsoever.

    Your music retailer is now no longer a spacious shop with hundreds of boxes on shelves, but a small boutique establishment with a licence to copy, a fast Internet connection, a computer, and a bank of CD writers. All legal and above board. What's your problem? Providing a useful service perhaps?

  • Correct me if I'm wrong but.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jimicus ( 737525 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:23AM (#8643080)
    does this new law include a provision making it illegal for the recording industry to produce "copy protected" CDs?

    Because if not I envision the situation becoming "you're legally entitled to copy it but good luck trying!".

    • How about "you're legally entitled to make your discs unplayable while keeping them playable, but good luck trying!"?
      • Not quite sure I follow you but my point was somewhat theoretical.

        The point being, if the record industry successfully produces 100% un-crackable (at least to normal consumers) copy protection which still plays on 100% of CD players, would such a CD be illegal in NZ?

        Because unless it is, all this law will prevent is the record industry suing people who make copies for personal use. It won't make it physically possible to make such copies in the first place.

    • does this new law include a provision making it illegal for the recording industry to produce "copy protected" CDs?

      No it doesn't, although it should. I'd like to see a law which makes 'fair use rights' into something to which we are entitled, and which the media producers shall not impede.

      In the meantime, being allowed to do this is a small step forward. You're allowed to make a copy if you can... let's just hope they won't slap you with charges of cracking codes, DMCA, and other assorted laws.

  • Strange, they seem a little late with this law... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by iwein ( 561027 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:27AM (#8643091)
    The change would make it legal for someone who owns a legitimately obtained CD to make one copy for their own private use. Under the widely flouted current law, all copying, even that for personal listening, is banned.

    Hmmm, i thought it was quite normal to have the right to make a copy for personal use. Oh well, maybe it's just that i'm not a US citizen..
    look here [neil.eton.ca] and mind this quote: (...) CD-Rs were not seen as a media intended for copying music.

  • I would like Sony NZ to Explain (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Blue_Wombat ( 737891 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:36AM (#8643115)
    Sony NZ should be asked to explain this quote from the article: "Sony NZ managing director Michael Glading said he was totally opposed to the move, which he believed would 'open the floodgates' to unrestricted piracy."

    Sony NZ sells Minidisc recorders with software to rip CDs. Also, the NZ Sony Style shop (corner of Lambton Quay and Willis Street for any interested Kiwis) last week (it may still be there this week, have not looked) had a *huge* window display exhibiting their new hard drive jukebox product. This included photos of all the stacks of CDs you could do away with by copying them to said jukebox.

    Furthermore, given that the NZ recording industry association clearly opposes this, and considers it illegal and "theft" at present, will they explain why they don't: (1) expel Sony NZ (which is a member); and (2) seek criminal prosecution of Sony executives. After all, Sony is selling the tools that permit the "theft" from their members, and blatantly advertising this capability as the main reason to purchase

    It is a bit rich for Sony to sell products and then lobby for it to be illegal for the hapless consumer to use the products Sony has sold them.

    Now the obligatory:

    1. Sell overpriced product to consumers

    2. Profit

    3. Lobby to keep using what you have just sold illegal

    4. Prosecute your customers for buying from you

    5. More profit

    A business strategy to make the RIANZ and RIAA proud.

  • Is this just for audio or for all media? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:44AM (#8643141)
    Making it for all media would mean that time-shifting TV programs would be ok, copying a DVD to as "media center" and watching it would be ok, copying a game to the hard disk and playing it would be ok etc. i.e., as long as only one copy is in use at once, you can have multiple physical copies.

  • Selling the same thing over and over again is good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GreatDrok ( 684119 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @04:46AM (#8643150) Journal
    For the producers of the media.

    Look at the windfall that occured when CD came in, large amounts of profit made from people buying the same material again on the new format. Now that it is in digital format, how is the industry going to repeat that windfall now that everyone has bought pretty much every CD they are ever likely to need and the current music production is ghastly. I for one know that the 2.7K tracks I have on my iPod is quite frankly enough. If people are able to copy this material for their own use then you can have backups.

    Strictly speaking when you buy a CD you are buying a license to the material, not he delivery media. By preventing people from being able to copy the material they have a license to onto a fresh media platform the record companies are trying to preserve the cash flow generated by selling people multiple licenses to the same thing which is frankly, money for old rope!

    Incidentally, a similar thing has happened with TV, certainly in the UK anyway. Here if you get Sky (Murdoch's digital sat system) you get a single box and a single card. If you want to record one channel and watch another you need two boxes and two subscriptions, paying twice for the same thing. This also strikes me as quite unfair.
  • Cool! When is the next bus to New Zealand?

  • Tuned Hummingbirds (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hoonis ( 20223 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @05:31AM (#8643271) Homepage
    I suppose overclocking them is out of the question.
  • "For the purposes of this Act, the author of a work is the person who creates it." Nobody can create information. You can only discover it.

  • My message to Michael Glading (Score:5, Informative)

    by darkpurpleblob ( 180550 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @07:52AM (#8643730)

    Hi Michael,

    I have just read the article at http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2852764a11,00. html [stuff.co.nz]. You say you are totally opposed to the move, because you believe it would "open the floodgates" to unrestricted piracy.

    As a software developer I spend a lot of time in front of a computer at both home and work. I like to listen to music when I am using computers. Under the current law (which is what you support, given that you are totally opposed to the move), I can only legally play copyrighted music from CDs in CD-ROM drives on my computers (and don't even get me started on copy-controlled CDs). During the course of a workday, this means interrupting my workflow up to 10 times to switch CDs. Of course, if I decide I'm sick of a CD before it is finished it means another switch. Clearly switching CDs quickly gets annoying. It also proves very annoying to transport CDs I want to listen to between work and home each day.

    In fact (as I am sure you are aware), Sony itself currently sells Minidisc recorders which currently allow music to be copied illegally under the current law. Given your position, I hope you are overseeing the removal of these useless recorders (as it is illegal for people to use them to copy music) from sale in New Zealand.

    However, if the law changes to allow fair personal use, my life suddenly becomes easier because I can make a copy of my music in a digital format which makes it much easier to transport and switch between listening to different music.

    Your viewpoint is analagous to saying no-one should be able to drive cars because some people speed and cause accidents in which people die. However, in real life, people are allowed to drive cars. Why? Because cars make our lives easier. The speeding problem is dealt with through driver education, and dealing punishment to those who do speed as a discouragement to them and others. Similarly the music sharing problem is dealt with by consumer education, and dealing punishment to those who do share music as a discouragement to them and others.

    Without education and punishment, the current law would be effectively 'powerless' to discourage people from sharing copyrighted music. Under the proposed changes, it still will be illegal to share copyrighted music. Provided there is still continued education and punishment, I can't see any reason why the proposed law change will result in increased music sharing activity.

    By opposing the move, you are only denying otherwise law abiding consumers the opportunity to use technology to make their lives easier.


    Simon

  • Still doesn't cut the mustard... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by darkpurpleblob ( 180550 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @08:03AM (#8643772)

    From the article:

    The change would make it legal for someone who owns a legitimately obtained CD to make
    one copy for their own private use.

    So under the proposed changes, it would still be illegal for me to have more than one digital copy of a CD I own i.e. one on a work computer and one on a home computer (correct me if I am wrong - IANAL)

  • Bill Of No Rights (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Steve B ( 42864 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @10:13AM (#8644837)
    It's taking away people's rights to earn a living

    There is no such right. If there were, I could do any old thing that I cared to define as "work" and demand that somebody pay me to do it.

  • So why hasn't Canada or the USA imploded yet? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CKW ( 409971 ) on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @10:32AM (#8645054) Journal

    The story says "allow one copy" of a recording you already own.

    We already have this right in Canada. I think most Americans take it as a God given right.

    Can someone compare the NZ recording industry gross proceeds vs Canada/USA (maybe normalize for population)?

    Can someone compare the NZ-RIA "claims" of copyright violations per year vs the R/C-RIA "claims" of copyright violations per year (and normalize for population)?

    Their claims are just idiotic. Reminds me of the kind of utter illogic and delusion you get from listening to Iraqi Tribesmen and Mullah's (no offense, but really!) If only we could get the XX-RIA orgs and Labels to listen to themselves:

    "OMG OMG OMG OMG if people can listen to their CDs through non CD-players, THE FUCKING SKY WILL FALL AND ALL OUR BASE WILL BELONG TO THEM"

    Hee hee, yeah, that's right, keep screwing around with "the laws" and focusing on "p2p" as the great evil enemy instead of focusing on delivering PRODUCTS that people CARE ABOUT or WANT (other than teeny boppers I mean).

    According to our relentless pace of technological progress, in 10-15 years I'll be able to walk over to my friends place with something in the palm of my hand, and give him a copy of every single audio recording ever made - and it'll cost us next to NOTHING.

    Right now if someone were to walk over to their neighbours place, you'd have to carry the device in a plastic bag and it could only contain 50,000 songs and would take a few days and $200 of receiving hardware to copy.

    Notice something? I didn't use the Internet or p2p, not even ONCE! So when will "the hammer drop"? When all the *average* schmucks like my Mom and non-techie friends figure out that they can do this, and actually start asking their friends "can I come over with my portable storage device"?

    "You have no chance, make your time"

  • Now, that's funny: (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DF5JT ( 589002 ) <slashdot@bloatware.de> on Tuesday March 23, 2004 @05:44PM (#8650056) Homepage
    From the article:

    "Sony NZ managing director Michael Glading said he was totally opposed to the move, which he believed would "open the floodgates" to unrestricted piracy.

    "At the end of the day, you're sending a message that it's okay to copy, and that is going to kill our business. It's taking away people's rights to earn a living, and that's horrendous."

    Someone should clue this guy in over tha fact that it was Sony that introduced the SCMS (Serial (referred to as Sony) Copy Management System as part of the audio CD standard. Sony has explicitly allowed consumers to make a first generation digital copy of a CD.

    See: http://www.xs4all.nl/~jacg/dcc-faq/scms.html

    20 years ago it was desirable to respect the consumers' right of fair use, and today it's killing the business. Yeah, right.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't tell me I'm burning the candle at both ends -- tell me where to get more wax!!"

Close