Dean FH Macy wrote:
>
> Jacqueline/Connie wrote:
>
> > I just got the newspaper from the musician's union and there is quite a
> > controversy over the MP3 site and how they have made available copywritten
> > music to the masses. Personally, I have not spent much time using MP3
> > technology but it did cross my mind that people could get music off the
> > internet instead of buying it. Anyone have any comments?
Um can we clear something up?
MP3 is a file format for audio, popular because of the
*realative* good quality it gives. many poepple are swapping
MP3 files of copyrighted musoc for free. This file swapping
is really popular with tennagers adn college students.
MP3.com is a site that acted as a music bank for people who
wanted to listen material they already owned at home on CD.
I understood that one of the things MP3 had done was
mechanically copy 80000 albums illegally, and making money
off them. No money they were making was being returned to
artist either. So, each time they copied a CD to their hard
drive, that there is a breach opf copyright. Plus the fact
they were making a a heap of money off recorded works they
didnt own or have permission to use.
Does anyone think that is not a little twisted?
> It is amazing to me that this simple music bank technology could be twisted so
> much that the RIAA sued MP3 for copyright violations without having a clue as
to
> what was actually happening.
they must have had enough clue for the courts to agree. and
please say MP3.com, otherwise its really confusing. Sounds
like your saying someone sued a file format.
Rodge
|
|  |
