Proof the RIAA is fucking insane

In their eyes, it is illegal to rip a cd to your harddrive and put it on your MP3 player. By their terms the only legal way to put music on your MP3 player is to buy it from Itunes or some other retarded website trying to take advantage or artists. Nice. This is quite simply absurd.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071211-riaa-those-cd-rips-of-yours-are-still-unauthorized.html

"RIAA: Those CD rips of yours are still "unauthorized"

By Eric Bangeman | Published: December 11, 2007 - 10:46AM CT

Those MP3 and AAC files that you've ripped from your CD collection are still "unauthorized copies" in the eyes of the recording industry. In a brief filed late last week, the RIAA said that the MP3 files on a PC owned by a file-sharing defendant who had admitted to ripping them himself were "unauthorized copies."
Related Stories

* How the RIAA views its customers: completely untrustworthy
* Digital Freedom Campaign to organize students against RIAA abuse
* RIAA: we love fair use. No, really!
* Fixing the "clear mismatch" between technology and copyright law: six ideas

Atlantic v. Howell is a bit unusual because the defendants, husband and wife Jeffrey and Pamela Howell, are defending themselves against the recording industry's lawsuit without the benefit of a lawyer. They were sued by the RIAA in August 2006 after an investigator from SafeNet discovered evidence of file-sharing over the KaZaA network.

The Howells have denied any copyright infringement on their part. In their response to the RIAA's lawsuit, they said that the MP3 files on their PC are and "always have been" for private use. "The files in question are for transfer to portable devices, that is legal for 'fair use,'" reads their response.

After several years of litigation and nearly 30,000 lawsuits, making a copy of a CD you bought for your own personal usage is still a concept that the recording industry is apparently uncomfortable with. During the Jammie Thomas trial this fall, the head of litigation from Sony BMG testified that she believed that ripping your own CDs is stealing.

When asked by the RIAA's lead counsel whether it was wrong for consumers to make copies of CDs they have purchased, Jennifer Pariser replied in the negative. "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song," said Pariser. Making "a copy" of a song you own is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," according to Pariser.

At least the recording industry is consistent. Last year, during the triennial review of the DMCA by the US Copyright Office, the record labels made the case that although consumers could freely and easily make copies of music on CDs, doing so is not explicitly authorized by the labels. Since they have not expressly authorized copying—even for the purposes of making backups—the ability to make copies should not be mistaken for fair use.

Based on the filing in Atlantic v. Howell and Pariser's testimony, a lot of us have a bunch of "unauthorized" and "stolen" music on our hard drives—music that we've purchased ourselves. The recording industry may finally be making some serious strides to win consumers over by removing the shackles of DRM, but its continued insinuations that its customers are thieves threatens to disperse any build-up of goodwill among its customers."