Car Firms Sued for 'CD rip' System, BBC Reports | GM Takes Another Hit

[Team THRT Drift]

A group representing musicians in the US is suing Ford and General Motors over in-car CD players that allow tracks to be stored on a hard drive.

The entertainment systems can "rip" music from a disc, to save passengers from constantly re-inserting CDs.

The Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies claims the devices are made "for the express purpose" of copying CDs.

It says its members, including MGMT and REO Speedwagon, are due loyalties.

In a class action lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia, the Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies (AARC) claims it repeatedly asked Ford and General Motors "to live up to their statutory obligations" but the firms refused.

The association says its artists are due loyalty payments under the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) of 1992, which states musicians are entitled to compensation for the copying of their works.

The defendants, it says, "refused to pay the royalties that congress has determined they owe for the recording devices they manufacture, import, and/or distribute".

The AARC says the devices concerned have been offered in GM brand models including Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet and GMC, since at least 2011.


The AARC represents 300,000 performers, including rapper Pitbull
A similar device has been available on numerous Ford and Lincoln models.

The AARC is also suing automotive technology company Denso and Clarion, which develops the in-car entertainment systems.

It says other manufacturers of similar devices have complied and are paying loyalties.

The AARC represents more than 60% of the recipients of AHRA royalties.

Source:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28547853

 

[TenEightyOne]

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28547853

Surely providing the equipment isn't the issue, it's when people use them for that purpose, whether that's the express purpose-in-design or not?

It's fair that artists are rewarded for copying of their work but simply being the provider of facilitating equipment doesn't tell anyone who used it or with which musical works.

I wonder if Microsoft pay a licensing fee for the "Rip" button in Windows Media Player? It seems to me to be provided for the express purpose of copying digital audio data into a file format that I can use without constantly switching CDs.

 

[Xilor]

Frankly I don't see what the problem is. The music is stored on your car's hard drive and you can't use it to produce new CDs, upload it on the internet, or do anything else with it that would be in conflict with copyright laws.

 

[Team THRT Drift]

Guess most musicians flopped and are lookig for a quick buck

Seriously though, if I buy a CD, I am entitled to do whatever I want to do with it for my personal enjoyment. I don't want to reinsert the CD over and over again, so I burn it into the hard drive.

 

[BobK]

I strongly suspect that if one were to dig into this a bit deeper they'd find that the RIAA and/or Sony (almost the same thing) are at the bottom of this. These are the people who won't let you play your radio in public because it constitutes an "illegal rebroadcast" and feel that if three people are listening to a song or watching a movie in your house, then three copies of the media must be purchased.

Seriously though, if I buy a CD, I am entitled to do whatever I want to do with it for my personal enjoyment. I don't want to reinsert the CD over and over again, so I burn it into the hard drive.

That's exactly how I feel. Unfortunately, Sony/RIAA don't agree. And they're the ones who have been purchasing legislators to enforce their view.

Personally I feel this suit is totally without merit, but given the right venue I can see them winning the case.

 

[Team THRT Drift]

Unfortunately they might win it. At the bottom of the article it states that other manufacturers are bending over (paraphrasing) and paying their 'dues'.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

What do I care? I'll just download the songs off the internet.

Frankly, while they might have a legitimate case, I very much doubt the system is actually used by many people. CDs are pretty outdated and it'd be easier just to have a USB drive with all your music on it. You know, downloaded or ripped from your old CD/LP collection...

 

[wfooshee]

Part of the issue, perhaps all of the issue (which I'm amazed nobody has pointed out,) is the borrowing of CDs from friends and ripping them to your player. Now you're into the same issue with music "sharing" that has always been objectionable to the RIAA. You like a CD but not enough to drop 20 bucks on it, and your friend has it? No problem!!!!

 

[Xilor]

Or you can download the music for free off the Internet, put it on your phone, MP3 player, or even a USB stick, and use that in your car.

Really its not like they will force people to buy CDs again by outlawing in-car hard drives, they'll just spoil what's genuinely a pretty cool feature.

 

[Coxis]

Let's sue camera manufacturers because you can use their cameras to take pictures of copyrighted paintings / photos.

 

[Robin]

How is this different from ripping a CD to anything else for personal consumption. Every computer on earth can do same thing and ironically have more functionality to potentially distribute that material unlike the car unit. Why not sue all the tech manufacturers in the world then?

The same thing happened when cassette tapes came out, the music industry was up in arms about people recording the radio and making mix tapes.

 

[LeMansAid]

Kind of makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, as it reminds of the days when piracy took a bit of effort. The way things have gone I don't think that people will be bothered sharing a "precious" cd around so that all of their friends can have a free copy ripped to their car's player.

 

[Imari]

Kind of makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, as it reminds of the days when piracy took a bit of effort. The way things have gone I don't think that people will be bothered sharing a "precious" cd around so that all of their friends can have a free copy ripped to their car's player.

Ah, back when we had to wait for a good song to come on the radio so we could scramble to push the record button and hopefully catch most of it on tape?

That was kind of fun, I'll admit.

 

[Azuremen]

I strongly suspect that if one were to dig into this a bit deeper they'd find that the RIAA and/or Sony (almost the same thing) are at the bottom of this. These are the people who won't let you play your radio in public because it constitutes an "illegal rebroadcast" and feel that if three people are listening to a song or watching a movie in your house, then three copies of the media must be purchased.

I really wish the RIAA/AARC would die already; it is just a bunch of middlemen being the worst kind of middlemen.

Honestly, I don't see this workout for them as judges are becoming more aware of how absurd these lawsuits are. The US laws also don't provide much merit, given that recording devices for personal use have always been ruled in favor of over the decades, such as VHS and tapes, despite huge efforts by the MPAA and RIAA to prevent them. Same with MP3 players and CD-ripping to make use of them. And the MP3 format.

Amusingly, this would have better luck in Canada where burnable media and MP3 are/were (I haven't checked in a while) being taxed under the assumption they'd be used for piracy.

 

[Team THRT Drift]

I want to know who these manufacturers are that had paid 'loyalties'. That's just giving in and letting them win these absurd cases.

 

[The Bman]

So they're technically saying that if you were to put your CD in the vehicle's player and installs them in the hard drive - which cannot be used for computers, iPods, etc. - to listen anytime, it's piracy.

Greed at it's finest, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[White & Nerdy]

I'm guessing those CDs I made with legitimately purchased iTunes music are illegal too.

This is all garbage.

 

[Azuremen]

I'm guessing those CDs I made with legitimately purchased iTunes music are illegal too.

Wait, you condemn modern design philosophy, techology and convenience on the claim it makes us wimps while buying music from iTunes?

 

[White & Nerdy]

Mostly in the area of automotive design. Go ahead, have your phone that's also a camera and general pocket computer (although I still think iPhones in particular have a bit of a stigma). Your car, however, should just be a car. A stereo and a heater is enough equipment as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Azure Flare]

When someone buys music from iTunes and copies them to whatever they want want for their personal use, I see no problem with that. I have music on my computer, PS Vita, and PS3, and I had not used them for any other purpose.

When someone else copies music that they bought from iTunes and gets them to other people for profit or not, that is wrong.

 

[niky]

Mostly in the area of automotive design. Go ahead, have your phone that's also a camera and general pocket computer (although I still think iPhones in particular have a bit of a stigma). Your car, however, should just be a car. [strike]A stereo and a heater is[/strike] A seat is enough equipment as far as I'm concerned.

In my days, we didn't buy cars with stereos or AC. We just bought cars. And none of this namby pamby central locking... or locks for that matter... or even those sissypants doors... or those consarn it electric starters. Yew had ta crank that sucker by hand.

-

I do believe iTunes, being digital distribution, already includes license for the music offered.

Of course, music not offered on iTunes but ripped from a CD... that's another matter... but I think enough companies are on-board with iTunes for it not to become an issue, and the software itself is pretty restrictive on how it copies to your iPhone or iPod.

-

Which all goes out the window when you consider those converted files can simply be copied straight off your hard drive.

You know... like any Joe Schmoe can pull the hard drive from his car to illegally rip the music contained in the proprietary software to the internet... oh, wait... it's harder?

 

[Shaun]

Ah, back when we had to wait for a good song to come on the radio so we could scramble to push the record button and hopefully catch most of it on tape?

And then curse the DJ to hell for talking over the last five or so seconds of the song.

 

[Team THRT Drift]

And then curse the DJ to hell for talking over the last five or so seconds of the song.

Hell, at least they talked back then. Now you have radio commentators singing along to the song. It's bad enough that they sing along to the song, but they lower the song's volume so you could hear their 'beautiful' voice over the original artist.

 

[Imari]

Hehe, ITT grumpy old men remembering how it used to be...

 

[BobK]

Nobody is due loyalty as a matter of right. REO Speedwagon has just forfeited any chance they had of gaining any loyalty from me (I'm not into rap, so Pitbull doesn't really figure into it).

What's particularly nonsensical is that you have to buy the CD in the first place (not getting into issues of borrowing or provenance of the CD) and you can only play the music on the device you inserted the CD into, so I can't understand on what basis additional royalties are due.

 

[Grayfox]

Why dont they sue companies like microsoft or apple?

They have had CD ripping on the computer for years.
And since it is on a PC it is easily uploaded to the internet.

So why dont they sue them?

Because it is a money grab.

 

[Pupik]

And hopefully if anyone has enough legal clout to lay a smackdown on the AARC and ostensibly, the RIAA, it's the major American automakers. Once they realized they can't bully fifty-million individuals for roughly $40 each, they'll go after consolidated industries with some cash reserves, which are likely to throw a check at the situation to make it go away (since it's not their core business).

Just who is buying two copies of the same work on the same medium within any recent span of time? A sucker...but they know more people are going to be sold on convenience with multiple layers of actual inconvenience wrapped onto it to make some suits, promoters, and managers happy.

 

[TenEightyOne]

REO Speedwagon has just forfeited any chance they had of gaining any loyalty from me

Whooaaaa, @BobK, no need for everything to get crazy!

In seriousness, it sounds to me as though some music-companies/rights-holders have hammered out a deal on these devices (or devices similar in principle) back in the early easy-digital days when everyone was terrified of being implicit in copyright theft. That was, what, about 10 years ago?

My guess is that they're using that precedent to force more companies to sign up without considering that nowadays people will actually know a lot more about the issue.

Not only do I hope that GM are able to repel this bid (show it the Vauxhall Meriva interior, that could repel Ray Charles from 50m) but I also hope that companies on existing agreements find some wiggle-room to escape the hook.

 

[BobK]

I really wish the RIAA/AARC would die already; it is just a bunch of middlemen being the worst kind of middlemen.

Couldn't agree more.

Amusingly, this would have better luck in Canada where burnable media and MP3 are/were (I haven't checked in a while) being taxed under the assumption they'd be used for piracy.

A similar "piracy tax" was proposed here in the US a while back. I am staunchly anti-piracy, and it would have gone up my posterior orifice sideways if I had to pay this tax on blank CDs etc that were being used for legitimate purposes. It's also quite possible it would have modified my stand on piracy; hey if I'm being charged for it then I may as well do it, right?

Because it is a money grab.

And that right there, folks, is what this is really all about.

 

[tankuroded]

I strongly suspect that if one were to dig into this a bit deeper they'd find that the RIAA and/or Sony (almost the same thing) are at the bottom of this. These are the people who won't let you play your radio in public because it constitutes an "illegal rebroadcast" and feel that if three people are listening to a song or watching a movie in your house, then three copies of the media must be purchased.

Seriously though, if I buy a CD, I am entitled to do whatever I want to do with it for my personal enjoyment. I don't want to reinsert the CD over and over again, so I burn it into the hard drive.

That's exactly how I feel. Unfortunately, Sony/RIAA don't agree. And they're the ones who have been purchasing legislators to enforce their view.

Personally I feel this suit is totally without merit, but given the right venue I can see them winning the case.

This post made me think of "first-sale doctrine" rule. Do you think these people (which is filling suit) want to make that "all music CDs are licensed, not sold", just like computer software? 💡