I am new to the world of sharing music files. I recently subscribed to a music file sharing service for around US$25 for two years. The quality of files downloaded so far is excellent.

The question is, is sharing of music files still legal? The recording companies and musical artists would argue that they are being cheated out of their royalties and commissions. However a US judge in 2003 gave a court ruling that this practice is legal.

Am I required to share any of my music files which I previously purchased as CDs in order for the practice to be still legal? At the moment I am given the option to close my file sharing port and just download music files.

If I share my music files with other computer users, what are the risks involved in being exposed to various hacker threats?

Sharing music files has been going on since the days of Napster,when bored college kid Sean Fanning decided to write code for file sharing.Everyone knows what the outcome was.Now he's back,legal,and having done deals with the 'big boys',you can download X amount of tracks for a monthly,and/or individual fee.

However,there are P2P sites out there which offer,for a one off fee,as many tracks as you want to download to your PC.Likewise,others can upload off your hard drive.

The consequences are obvious.For a small payment of cash you can fill your free space up with zillions of music tracks,copy them to CDR,and flog them to your mates for a low amount.

Even Sean Fanning's 'legal' way has already been hacked,and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to see how it's done.

The bad boys of the net,will always try to be one step ahead of the rest.As a background to how things stand in the UK,have a look at this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...ic/4318765.stm

As you can see,the music industry is lashing out at the little people!

What is pathetic about the whole industry,is that the music giants for far too long have been charging the rest of us,over-the-odds for our music.Sorry,their music!

If they had been sensible,and charged the public a reasonable fee for their products in the first place,maybe the industry would not be in this mess now.

I don't encourage illegal downloads,not because I agree with the music giants,but the fact I don't want 'anyone' hacking into my PC,and maybe leaving a trojan horse for me to fight away later.

As you said,you are downloading tracks 'legally' for a fee,but I would always advise caution on the hidden content you may also be installing.

All the best,
Nez.

Hi,
I totally agree with Nez. Anytime you "open" up your computer for others, it is only asking for problems.
Also, agree with downloading can, and probably does, contain advertising/spyware programs.
I suggest using one of the best, free, programs; called Spyware Blaster. This program is not one like AdAware_SE, where you scan your computer. This program scans stuff for you, as it tries to get into your computer, and stops it.

You can get it here, if you wish:

http://www.download.com/SpywareBlast...ml?tag=lst-0-2

It also has updates to "definitions" every week or so.

Just for information:
If you wish to add or subtract from an Experts' reputation, or show appreciation or discontent with an answer, click on the "balance scales" icon by the Experts' name. You can then choose what you wish.

Best wishes,
fredg

Always,
Your 1st 2 replies didn't exactly answer your question. That "sharing" copyrighted material has NEVER been legal. Both before and after the court rulings you refer to.

What the court said is that file-sharing networks are not illegal. Since these networks can be used for legal purposes (i.e. sharing uncopyrighted or public domain material), the networks themselves are not illegal. An analogy would be its not illegal to own a knife, but it would be illegal to use that knife to kill someone. In the decision, the court specifically noted that the decision does not make sharing of copyrighted material legal.

If you share copyrighted material from CDs that you purchased, that is what will make the RIAA come after you. For the time being, they are going after the uploaders as the bigger villains. The downloading of copyrighted material is no different then stealing a CD from a store.

Whether the service charges a fee or not, doesn't affect its legality. The only way such a service would be legal is if some part of that fee goes to the RIAA to pay royalties. If that were the case I would think the site would display that info prominately. You can always try checking with the RIAA to determine if a site is legal or not. To my knowledge the only site that allows downloading based on a monthly fee is Napster. All the other legal sites charge a per track fee, that is generally $.99 or less.

-------------------
An aside to Nez. Sean Fanning is not behind the new Napster. Fanning sold rights to the Napster name after the courts shut Napster down. Napster opened again as a fee based service and they own rights to the music they offer.

I don't disagree with you, that the music labels screwed up by not changing their model quickly enough. But I don't believe that justifies stealing, which is what we are really talking about. The RIAA went after large scale uploaders. People who offered hundreds of MBs of copyrighted material for "sharing". Frankly, I have no sympathy for these people. What they did was clearly illegal.

Your right Scott,Sean Fanning is now behind Snocap P2P music service,based on Wayne Russo's (formally Grokster) Mashbox file sharing platform,which enables provider to "identify" each song by its "fingerprint",thus enclosing each track in a set of licensing rules,set in advance by the artist,or more likely their music label.
I believe this service has already been hacked by the idiots.

Sharing music as you say,has never been legal.So stupid is the law,that even letting someone listen with you to your new cd album,is 'illegal' :D

File sharing is a minefield for the lawyers to sort out,the music industry to shout "hot air" and the downloaders to 'tweek' more code.Buy your favourite music from your local store,put it on your player,plug-in your headphones,and have fun.

Er, but don't make a copy for anyone!

Stay legal,
Nez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nez

So stupid is the law,that even letting someone listen with you to your new cd album,is 'illegal' :D

---

Just adding an off subject point. I don't think letting other people listen to your new album is illegal. For example - Mercora (of whatever it's called) lets you stream your MP3 collection over the internet for other people to listen too like a radio station. I believe this is legal (or so their homepage said last time I looked at it)

Found this url http://www.utexas.edu/its/policies/music/ it makes a good read,plus lists 'legal' sites for listening to music,and video.

Hi Lee,my assurtion that it is illegal to let anyone listen with you to music you have just purchased is carring the law to it's full extent. :D

You mention streaming mp3's via Mercora? Being legal.Again,who owns the music,who has permission to do this,regardless of what a site may say.Probably the knives are out for this site as we speak,and one day their web page will display "404 error.Page not found",etc.

As I've said,the law is an ,with the poor public chasing their tails on who can do what.Here in the UK the music industry is hard at work prosecuting 'kiddies' who've decided to share their 'files' with school friends,while their parents end up paying a huge fine.


All the best,
Nez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LTheobald

Just adding an off subject point. I don't think letting other people listen to your new album is illegal. For example - Mercora (of whatever it's called) lets you stream your MP3 collection over the internet for other people to listen too like a radio station. I believe this is legal (or so their homepage said last time I looked at it)

---

Hmm, I've never heard of Mercora. But that is an interesting loophole. I agree with you that it's not illegal to let a friend listen to your CD, unless you charge the friend a fee to do so. I think that's clear in the law.

But I think this idea is gray area. If Mercora charges a fee to subscribe to the service then I think it would be illegal. Even if they don't, I think the legality is tenuous at best. Radio Stations pay royalties each time they play a song. To broadcast music, even if its not to make copies of it, without paying royalties seems to me to still be pirating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

If you share copyrighted material from CDs that you purchased, that is what will make the RIAA come after you. For the time being, they are going after the uploaders as the bigger villains. The downloading of copyrighted material is no different then stealing a CD from a store.

Whether the service charges a fee or not, doesn't affect its legality. The only way such a service would be legal is if some part of that fee goes to the RIAA to pay royalties. If that were the case I would think the site would display that info prominately. You can always try checking with the RIAA to determine if a site is legal or not. To my knowledge the only site that allows downloading based on a monthly fee is Napster. All the other legal sites charge a per track fee, that is generally $.99 or less.

---

Scott

Thank you for the helpful advice about the illegality of file sharing. I will definitely not be uploading any of my music files and sharing them as that clearly breaks copyright law and denies musical artists the royalties to which they are entitled.

Hundreds of millions of other computer users share music around the world and I doubt whether they will obey the strict letter of the law as there is strength in numbers. They break the law because frankly, the CD prices are currently way too expensive.

In my circumstances, I have paid a fee in good faith to a music downloading site which clearly states that the downloading of music from its site is "100 per cent legal". If it is not legal, then the recording companies should be looking at prosecuting them for false and misleading advertising, not persecuting the little guy who might download a dozen or so tracks each month.

I will still continue to videotape my favourite TV shows although that breaks copyright law too.

While researching the topic, I came across a helpful explanation about the
Privacy and security dangers of peer to peer file sharing.

http://www.cdt.org/testimony/030515davidson.shtml

So that I can sleep easier at night, I would like to know of any other sites other than Napster that are sanctioned by the recording industry.

Thanks for all your help everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by always_learning

Hundreds of millions of other computer users share music around the world and I doubt whether they will obey the strict letter of the law as there is strength in numbers. They break the law because frankly, the CD prices are currently way too expensive.

In my circumstances, I have paid a fee in good faith to a music downloading site which clearly states that the downloading of music from its site is "100 per cent legal". If it is not legal, then the recording companies should be looking at prosecuting them for false and misleading advertising, not persecuting the little guy who might download a dozen or so tracks each month.

I will still continue to videotape my favourite TV shows although that breaks copyright law too.

---

Always,
A couple of points here. First, I think, if you read the fine print from that site, what they are saying is that File sharing services are 100% legal, not sharing copyrighted material. I reviewed a similar message at another site just recently, and that was the case. The sites are using the court ruling to trumpet their legality, but they don't equally trumpet the fact that its always been and still is illegal to share copyrighted material.

Second, videotape favorite shows is legal as long as its for personal use only. This is from the videotape legislations that arose from similar lawsuits. The compromise was that every time a VCR or VHS tapes were purchased a royalty went to the MPAA. Copying for personal use then came under the fair use doctrine. To extend this further. Lets say I have an old LP I purchased years ago. Now I want to use that music in my portable CD player. I would be within my legal right to download an MP3 of that music and then burn to CD. The key is I already paid for the license to use that music. So I have the right to copy it for personal use. Doesn't matter how I obtain the copy.

Finally, while I agree that music prices are too high and I'm not happy with the draconian measures taken by the RIAA and MPAA I don't feel that gives anyone a justification to steal. No matter how the pirates try to justify it (and there are several rationalizations used), its still stealing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

No matter how the pirates try to justify it (and there are several rationalizations used), its still stealing.

---

No, it isn't. It's copyright infringement. Not theft. :)


always_learning,

It's difficult to get you an "absolute" answer without knowing under which country's laws you live. The laws pertaining to this issue are very different among countries, for example, the US and Canada have different definitions of what constitutes copyright infringement in this context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psi42

No, it isn't. It's copyright infringement. Not theft. :)

---

Hey they don't call it "piracy" for nothing. ;)

But your point about copyright laws is valid. They do differ, though there are some international standards.

Here's a question, what if I don't share anything, but just download what others are sharing. Some p2p programs let you do that. Is it still technically illegal? I was under the impression that the law said something like "distribution of copyrighted material" was against the law, but would just taking the stuff count as distribution?

Me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mesilly

heres a question, what if i dont share anything, but just download what others are sharing. some p2p programs let you do that. is it still technically illegal? i was under the impression that the law said something like "distribution of copyrighted material" was against the law, but would just taking the stuff count as distribution?

me

---

Stealing: to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully

Its not only technically illegal, it's the same as walking into a music store and shoplifiting a CD. You are taking something that you are not entitled to take. That's stealing. Copyright law says you are not entitled to make use of copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright holder. That permission is generally obtained by paying a fee for the right to use the material for personal use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mesilly

heres a question, what if i dont share anything, but just download what others are sharing. some p2p programs let you do that. is it still technically illegal?

---

It depends upon the copyright laws in effect where you live. In the US it is illegal; I believe the laws are different on this point in Canada (but I'm not sure); and of other countries I have no idea.

May we ask what country you live in?