[grooveless touque]

Online music swapping legal: court
Last Updated Wed, 31 Mar 2004 14:20:36

TORONTO - People who share music files on the internet are safe after a Federal Court rejected a motion on Wednesday that would have allowed the music industry to sue them.

Justice Konrad von Finckenstein said the Canadian Recording Industry Association hadn't shown copyright infringement by 29 people who had allowed their music files to be uploaded.

Making files available in online, shared directories is within the bounds of Canadian copyright law, von Finckenstein ruled.

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

The Canadian Recording Industry Association last month asked the judge to order the country's largest internet providers to release the names of 29 people who share copyrighted music through music swapping networks such as Kazaa, Grokster and Morpheus.

The music industry wants to shut down internet file sharing of music, blaming it for plummeting sales of compact discs.

Last year, the recording industry in the United States began going after people who share music online.

The Recording Industry Association of America has sued about 400 individuals in the U.S. for allowing others access to song files. Several people have settled out of court for about $3,000 US each.

On Tuesday, the recording industry sent warning letters or filed charges against 247 people in Denmark, Germany, Italy and Canada.

Written by CBC News Online staff

[highlander]

Wow..wonder how the courts decided it was okay to distribute copyrighted material (music) on the net?

[chris]

"No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings," von Finckenstein wrote in his 28-page ruling. "They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service."

I think that the judge was saying that what the people did wasn't illegal, not that distributing copyrighted material is OK. The recording association were accusing the people "sharing" the music, not arguing whether sharing music was legal.

[VioletlightHeron]

Basically, the law in Canada doesn't explicitly say that "sharing" media over a P2P network is illegal like pirating a copy of a cd or dvd and selling it on the street. Did anybody read about the study that was done that suggested downloading has no affect on the sales of commercially popular albums? I think this makes sense, because some of the people who download are looking for the most popular tunes, if they like it then they go out and buy the album. I also think downloading also helps niche artists gain exposure, which helps them with sales because lets face it, if a band or artist isn't commercial enough, the mainstream media industry basically ignores it . There have been plenty of times where I've been exposed to interesting groups through downloading and then gone out and bought what albums are available.

[chris]

I've heard about, and read many articles stating the very same thing. I also think that although the top-selling, one hit wonder albums may not sell as well; the fringe/niche artists gain exposure, and potential new sales.

[VioletlightHeron]

I think that both regular media coverage and downloading will hurt so-so one hit wonder albums, more so together than apart. It's ironic because the regular media exposure and critics will point out which songs on an album are good and which aren't, allowing people to pick and choose the songs off the net, where they couldnt before. I remember buying the debut Silverchair album when it came out when I was a teenager because I liked exactly 2 songs on the album and had to buy the whole bloody thing to get the songs I wanted :lol:

[Jenna_Bird]

I remember buying the debut Silverchair album when it came out when I was a teenager because I liked exactly 2 songs on the album and had to buy the whole bloody thing to get the songs I wanted :lol:

I remember doing the same sort of thing with Candlebox.... :roll: the ignorance (and bad taste) of my youth.

-Jenna

[clearlyentranced]

The judge also said that sharing music was like a library putting a photocopy machine in it, and letting people photocopy books that were under copyright, cool guy.

[VioletlightHeron]

I think the RIAA should focus more on the clowns who pirate cd's and movies and offer them for dirt cheap on the street. A friend of mine in the Philippines had the Spiderman movie on DVD the day it was released in the US movie theaters for 8 bucks! hock: That's cutting into their bottom line more than people downloading off the net.Plus clamping down on regular consumers in the supposed name of the artist will start people looking into some of the more blatantly unfair contract practices the music industry engages in. Whoever heard of any other business gaining the lion's share of profit from selling something created by other person?? The music industry says that downloading hurts the regular joe artist/band but thats totally not true, most bands make probably 3-4 bucks at most off a 14-15 dollar album.