PDA

View Full Version : Would it be illegal to download songs...


JayC
11-24-2005, 04:06 PM
...that I already have on cassette? I have a bunch of Alabama songs on cassette from years ago. I'd like to put them on CD but have no way of doing it other than using something like Limewire.

Big Dog
11-24-2005, 04:13 PM
Go to limewire.com and git er done!

Junkman
11-24-2005, 07:49 PM
Have fun eliminating all the spyware that Limewire will install on your computer. :whistle:

JayC
11-24-2005, 08:01 PM
Limewire hasn't installed any spyware on my system. I run Spybot and AdAware regularly with a touch of Norton AntiVirus every now and then. Never detected anything. Now Kazaa on the other hand will dump lots on there.

Junkman
11-24-2005, 09:20 PM
I have found a lot of it on a friends computer that someone had used Limewire for music downloads. I assume that it came from Limewire, because every time I removed the program and cleaned up the computer, and that person would reinstall the software, along with it came all the spyware. I finally gave up trying to help him since he didn't keep others from doing what ever that wanted with his computer... Junk

Big Dog
11-25-2005, 08:39 AM
Limewire hasn't installed any spyware on my system.

Same here!

Doc
11-25-2005, 10:07 AM
Good question JayC. I've wondered the same thing. I've bought so many songs multiple times the record companies have made a fortune off of folks like us. Still, I'm afraid it is illegal according to the record company to download any music via limewire or kazza any all of the file sharing pgms. I hear there are private networks set up just for sharing data. These networks do not advertise and do not allow the general public to access their network.
I truely wish the record companies would embrace technology and sell MP3's for a quarter each, without any limiations on how we could use the MP3. I believe they are missing the boat and alienating the music buying public at the same time. I hate the stranglehold they have on the artists and the music buying public.

thcri
11-27-2005, 09:22 PM
I tried Limewire and did not find any spyware on my puter after install. I have also uninstalled Limewire because I beleive downloading songs from them is illegal and they have come up with a way to put the blame on you. So your on your own downloading the songs from them.

As far as your original question, since you have the original CD's or
Cassettes I think you are ok. You can take any CD or Cassette that you own and reproduce it as long as it for your self. You paid for the song so you should be able to copy it as long as it is for your own use.

But I am not an attorney but it is just me thinking. I copy a lot of my CD's and just take the songs I like instead of having to go through all of the ones I don't like when listening.

murph

Doc
11-28-2005, 07:52 AM
As far as your original question, since you have the original CD's or
Cassettes I think you are ok. You can take any CD or Cassette that you own and reproduce it as long as it for your self. You paid for the song so you should be able to copy it as long as it is for your own use.

murph

Murph, he owns the original cassette, but wonders if it is illegal to download the same song he has on cassette in MP3 format so that he can copy it to CD. While I doubt the record companies will come after the casual downloader, I do not believe this is legal, even though he owns a copy of the song he is downloading.
However I sure wish this was the case. I have hoards of LP's that I have slowly been rebuying the CD versions of my favorites. I would much prefer to download copies over the internet, since I own a copy already. The music companies want us to pay them once, twice and even a third time if they can get away with it. Hey Record companies: :finger3 f :finger2: :loser:

Dargo
11-28-2005, 07:59 AM
Yeah Doc, for better or worse, I agree with your take on this matter. I'm sure I have purchased some music in several different formats. My biggest beef is that the stuff I purchased on iTunes only plays on the computer that was used to purchase the music. :mad: So, that music represents music that I need to purchase yet again to be able to enjoy the way I wanted. In Consumer Reports last month they had a piece about iTunes music purchases not being compatible with most players. I'm in agreement that ripping people off like that will only make more people want to download music illegally so they can actually listen to the music when they want; not only when they are sitting at the computer that was used to download the music.

Doc
11-28-2005, 08:12 AM
Off the original topic, but thanks to you guys I will not be buying an IPOD for my daugther. She had one on her wish list, but didn't realize the way iTunes worked. It would have been a complete waste for her with what she wanted to do. After discussing it with her she would much prefer a good ole MP3 player.
Thanks for the heads up on iTunes and the limited use of the music you pay for from Apple. After knowing this I am surprised at the sucess Apple is having with these products.

Dargo
11-28-2005, 09:07 AM
Doc, you got me thinking about iTunes. I just tried to see if anywhere on the iTunes I have on my computer if it states what specific players are compatible. Nowhere does it mention this topic. I didn't waste a lot, but I probably wasted about $30 or so on tunes that will only play on my computer. I deleted the email response I got (I had over 5700 deleted messages in my "deleted" folder, so I dumped them all a couple of weeks ago) from iTunes after asking them why I couldn't copy the songs onto my MP3 players. Basically, it said they would not guarantee that their songs would be compatible with anything and that they were copy protected. All I know is that they will not copy to any Creative Labs player or any Rio player or any SanDisc player. So, based on that fact, they will not get another dollar from me! Grrrr:2gunsfiri

Doc
11-28-2005, 09:25 AM
Apple won't get a dollar from me either Dargo. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, Apple has always been that way. Even with their computers. They have good hardware and they would not release the OS code so that others could write software for them. This locked you into them as your only supplier. This was back in the 80's. They might have opened that up a bit nowdays.
I understand they have a good product, and I'm not knocking that, but I don't like they way they do business. Locking you into them and whatever they decide to release or allow you to run. I think Windows is predominant today because of Apple's decision to keep their closed market strategy.

thcri
11-28-2005, 10:23 PM
Murph, he owns the original cassette, but wonders if it is illegal to download the same song he has on cassette in MP3 format so that he can copy it to CD. While I doubt the record companies will come after the casual downloader, I do not believe this is legal, even though he owns a copy of the song he is downloading.


Doc,

I did understand that but thinking since he paid for it once he should be ok. He could just say he recorded it himself but the downloaded MP3 would be better quality than the cassette. If it was me I think I would take my chances on it and I am one that won't download any songs but in this case I just might.

murph

Dargo
11-29-2005, 08:25 AM
I think Windows is predominant today because of Apple's decision to keep their closed market strategy.

Oh, I definitely agree. I've had way too many people tell me that Mac is a better setup, but even those people admit they pay a price to get the equipment and continue to pay a price after they have it. I suppose the fact that Windows is far, far away the dominant OS (but not the best) must show that I'm not the only person who does not like being forced into higher pricing.

Melensdad
11-29-2005, 08:48 AM
Oh, I definitely agree. I've had way too many people tell me that Mac is a better setup, but even those people admit they pay a price to get the equipment and continue to pay a price after they have it. I suppose the fact that Windows is far, far away the dominant OS (but not the best) must show that I'm not the only person who does not like being forced into higher pricing.


Interesting comment.

I see things a bit differently. Apple does cost more 'up front' but I've seen it cost far less over time. In fact with all the forced upgrades that I see Windows forcing down the throats of buyers, each at a cost, what I see is that the long term ownership of Apple/Mac tends to even out and from the corporate standpoint, it probably costs significantly less to have a Mac due to upgrades, glitches, virus protection (virus, what's that?), spyware protection, etc.

We have both Apple/Mac OS and Windows OS computers here at work. The Apple computers require far fewer software and hardware upgrades and we don't even bother with virus protection on them since there has never been a successful virus attack that has been spread by a Mac. Ditto spyware. The darn computers simply work and keep on working.

Dargo
11-29-2005, 09:06 AM
In fact with all the forced upgrades that I see Windows forcing down the throats of buyers, each at a cost,

Ah, I just pirate those. :whistle: Otherwise, I'd be getting ripped off; right?! :smileywac

what I see is that the long term ownership of Apple/Mac tends to even out and from the corporate standpoint, it probably costs significantly less to have a Mac due to upgrades, glitches, virus protection (virus, what's that?), spyware protection, etc.

Dammit man, don't tell me that...

We have both Apple/Mac OS and Windows OS computers here at work. The Apple computers require far fewer software and hardware upgrades and we don't even bother with virus protection on them since there has never been a successful virus attack that has been spread by a Mac. Ditto spyware. The darn computers simply work and keep on working.

You're not going to be happy until you get into my pocket and have me buy an Apple, now are you? You're taking advantage of me because I do not have any experience on an Apple, aren't you?! :mad: If my 5 kids don't get any Christmas presents because I just had to buy me a new top of the line Apple computer, I'm going to tell them that you are to blame!!!!!!!

Oh yeah, I guess I also have to buy a new "iPod" brand MP3 player too. That way, maybe my songs I bought on iTunes might work somewhere other than on my computer. Oh, forget that; I forgot the damn passwords I had to create for each song I downloaded from there anyway...:mad:

bczoom
11-29-2005, 09:34 AM
In fact with all the forced upgrades that I see Windows forcing down the throats of buyers, each at a cost
What upgrades? OS? I never upgrade the OS at a cost. I do download fixes and service packs which are free.
I just buy a new PC every once in awhile and stick with whatever OS it came with.

Melensdad
11-29-2005, 09:38 AM
Dargo, that right. I am really scrooge, out to ruin Christmas for your kids.

The big downside that I see with Apple is that there are some business specific programs that simply are unavailable for the Mac OS. My purchasing department cannot use Apple computers because we have an AS/400 computer running our software but it requires a proprietary client piece that runs on a PC, it is not available for either Linux or Mac OS so the buyers must have Windows PCs. The office staff, managers and others simply need a 5250 emulator and run either Windows or Mac.

I suppose for you, the biggest downside to switching to a Mac would be the need for you to think with the other half of your brain. It is different. In some ways better, in some worse. But totally different.

What upgrades? OS? I never upgrade the OS at a cost. I do download fixes and service packs which are free.
I just buy a new PC every once in awhile and stick with whatever OS it came with.

Brian what I find is that we have to maintain the current versions of so many pieces of software so that our Windows computers can talk to each other that it becomes insane. One version of MS Word can read what another version writes, but that doesn't mean the the guy who sent the document can read your reply!!! So as we add a new computer to the system, or replace an older one, we end up with newer versions constantly coming into the building. Each new version will cause conflicts with some other systems that have older versions. It totally sucks. And the anti-virus subscriptions add up, and the anti-spyware. And heaven forbid that one idiot actually clicks on one of those spam emails that contains a worm. It can take our computer guys days of work to disinfect the network even with anti-virus/anti-spyware software. And if we don't upgrade then we find that a document we get from an offsite business associate won't read on some of our computers. Or we find that OUTLOOK calendar events or tasks won't work on all systems.

Overall I am pretty amazed that businesses adopted Windows, but I believe it was TECH driven not a FISCALLY driven choice.

PBinWA
11-29-2005, 11:28 AM
I love the confusion! Keeps this geek employed! The Mac migration to Intel makes things even better! :0

Durwood
12-13-2005, 11:04 AM
It is legal to make a back up copy to music that you own. There are companys out there who will do that for a fee and they are able legally to do it if you have the original. I had some records put on cd from a place that does that.They supposedly run it thru filters to get the best sound. I was not happy with the end result though and another internet buddy is gonna see if he can filter them more for a better sound.

Dur

Doc
12-13-2005, 11:21 AM
So, how about this scenerio. I own lots of albums. I don't own a turntable anymore. So I go and download songs from someplace like Limewire. If the music zars came after me and I could produce the LP for every song I downloaded, do you think that would be seen as 'legal'?

Durwood
12-13-2005, 11:39 AM
So, how about this scenerio. I own lots of albums. I don't own a turntable anymore. So I go and download songs from someplace like Limewire. If the music zars came after me and I could produce the LP for every song I downloaded, do you think that would be seen as 'legal'?

Ok, lets say they come after you. You show them the original albums, then you show them the backups. But then they find the songs on your computer too...you might have a problem then. I say cut the cds then get it off your computer. I don't know but i think you would be legal then.
http://www.dlfmusic.com/faqs.htm#legal_issues

EDIT- You will probably want to buy an old turntable or i guess you could tell them you sold it at a yard sell after making the cds.

Dur

buy_25
12-14-2005, 11:22 AM
So, how about this scenerio. I own lots of albums. I don't own a turntable anymore. So I go and download songs from someplace like Limewire. If the music zars came after me and I could produce the LP for every song I downloaded, do you think that would be seen as 'legal'?

The reading I read was the people who are downloading current movies and top 100 songs get nailed. The old stuff no one really cares. If they did, the millions and millions of people would cost more to fight then it is worth.

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 01:08 PM
Interesting comment.

I see things a bit differently. Apple does cost more 'up front' .....

Even this is not true anymore. $500 for a desktop Mac Mini and $1000 for a laptop iBook. Not exactly expensive.


If anyone is considering switching to a Mac but is not sure, I really suggest you don't spend a bunch of money for the top of the time Mac. The $500 Mac Mini is inexpensive and a way for you to get your feet wet.

If you decide after using, that it is the best thing since sliced bread, then you can think about getting a more expensive Mac down the road. BTW, moving your applications and files (migrating) to another new Mac is bonehead simple!

If you decide that it is not your cup of tea, then are not out a bunch of money. However, I would say I have never heard of anyone who has switched to the Mac and went back. Well there was that one instance where a person wrote an online artile claimed to have switched from a Mac to PC, but we later decovered that she was paid by Microsoft to write her story. But I am going off on a tangent here. ;-)

Anhow.. if you are not sure.. just buy something really cheap. that is the way I started on the Mac platform. I got the least expensive machine at the time to try it out for myself for a while. Now I have 5 machines.
Many people I have help switched have done similiar things. They start out with a inexpensive new model or a used model from ebay. Next thing you know they are buying more machines because they find they LOVE the machine. Cant say that I have ever LOVED any computer besides the Mac and my NeXTStations. My one friend tells me that he feels a little out of touch at the water cooler now that he has switched to the Mac about 2 years ago.. when people get together to talk about the latest virus that is spreading.. He says "Virus.. what virus?? I haven't heard of a new virus going around.." Then they say "Oh.. you are one of those Mac guys.. I don't get you Mac people.. you always think you are better then the rest of us". Whatever.

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 01:26 PM
Oh, I definitely agree. I've had way too many people tell me that Mac is a better setup, but even those people admit they pay a price to get the equipment and continue to pay a price after they have it.

My Father in Law still using a PowerMac made back in 1999. He has purchased Photoshop, MS-Office, and a a newer version of Mac OS X, and replaced the hard drive once (his machine is on 24/7 and eventually the hours ran out on the HDD). Other than that I don't think he has had to continuely pay money.
No virus checkers, registry protectors, spyware cleaners. He has never upgraded anything except the OS because he wanted some software which came with the new version of the OS (iPhoto). I don't think many people can claim they use a PC that is going on 7 years old and are happy with it. He just loves his PowerMac.

oh.. I have not upgrade the OS on any of my Macs (5 of them). I don't feel like I need to.

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 01:32 PM
Off the original topic, but thanks to you guys I will not be buying an IPOD for my daugther. She had one on her wish list, but didn't realize the way iTunes worked. It would have been a complete waste for her with what she wanted to do. After discussing it with her she would much prefer a good ole MP3 player.
Thanks for the heads up on iTunes and the limited use of the music you pay for from Apple. After knowing this I am surprised at the sucess Apple is having with these products.
the iPOD plays 2 kinds of formats. AAC AND MP3!!!
Apple's Music store only sells music in AAC format. This is why you can not play this music on third party music players. Because they do not support this format. Also, lets not confuse the iPOD as NOT being an MP3 player. It is an MP3 player. But it also plays AAC files too. If you don't like AAC format then only use MP3 files. They will work fine on the iPod just like any player out there. If you don't like iTunes then don't use it. You can download music to the iPod without iTunes if you want.

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 01:50 PM
Apple won't get a dollar from me either Dargo. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, Apple has always been that way. Even with their computers. They have good hardware and they would not release the OS code so that others could write software for them.

This is not true. They did allow other companies to make Macs. Remember Umax and PowerComputing? They made Macs and competed directly against the Apple brand Macs. When Apple bought NeXT computer in order to get the NeXTSTEP OS onto Macs, Steve Jobs stopped the open licensing of their OS to Umax and PowerComputing because he saw no benefit and a lot to lose. I should highlight the reason for this.. The NeXTSTEP OS used to only run on Steve Job's NeXT computers. He later opened it up and allowed NeXTSTEP to run on generic x86 PC that you could build yourself. I don't think after he thought it was a good experience and wanted to stop what was going on at Apple when Apple acquired him along with the NeXTSTEP OS. Recall that the Mac OS X operating system was planned to run on x86 too when they were porting it to the Mac HW. This was code named Yellow Box. The os running on PowerPC (Mac HW) was code named Blue Box. Eventually, Steve Jobs decided to drop the Yellow box effort.

Completely HW and SW integration is the reason that Macs work so well today. Its not a bad thing.

Now don't tell me you still think Mac HW is too expensive when you can buy a new Mac for $500. Ots amazing that people complain about the price of a tool that they use everyday. If you use it everyday and so many hours its it worth investing some money into something this is nice and comfortable??
Shoes, tractors, etc. Why are computer not in this category?
With as much as I think we use computers around here, I think the cost of using a PC vs Mac on an hourly basis is on the order of $0.01 cents per hour. If that. You probably spend a significant amount of money on electricity for that Pentium IV or Athlon, on an hourly basis, then you do on the actual computer... ha ha.

I just don't get it why people pick at the price all the time. $20,000 for a quality tractor that they put 100 hrs a year on is not a big deal $500-1000 for a computer they spend 20-40 hrs a week is way too expensive.. WTF?
And it seems no one even considers resale of computer. Yes there is a difference in resale between PCs and Macs. check eBay if you don't believe me.

Doc
12-14-2005, 01:58 PM
Okay OA ...your right. I forgot about the NeXt version. It never did make it main stream though.
Actually, I like what I now use. I do not need to pay out more money for an additional computer, even if the mini is 500 bucks. I believe the closed system that Mac does run for manufactoring helps ensure stability. But that comes at a price. I know you said the mini is 500, but i never go with the cheapest offering. That normally costs me more in the long run. Cause I'll find a few options that I think I need, so I have to upgrade or get another bigger box. .....Like I said, I'm happy with what I now use.

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 02:01 PM
.....Like I said, I'm happy with what I now use.
that is all that matters. If everone had the same love of the PC then we wouldn't even be talking about this. ;-)

OregonAlex
12-14-2005, 02:10 PM
the $500 Mac Mini is definately not for the person that likes to open up the case and do upgrades.. that is for sure.

Its targetted towards people who are thinking about switching from the PC to the Mac and no aspirations at openning it up and doing their own tweeking.
Which is a good goal IMHO because in reality most people never modify the guts of thier PC or want to.

And at $500, it really is worth it and comes with most things that you want.
If you try to piece together a PC with the same HW, buying the pieces yourself and putting it together, not even including the price of any software and the time you spend getting the pieces and putting it all together that $500 tag will be hard to compete with.

512MB RAM
40 GB HDD - 80GB add $50.
1.2 GHz PPC G4
Motherboard
CD Burner
ATI Video Card
10/100 Ethernet
Firewire for Digitial Video Editing
Case with Power Supply

go ahead and price it out if you wish in terms of "quality" PC parts equivelent to these above. Keep in mind you still have to give some value to the OS and software which comes with the Mac if you want to stay legal. No pirated copies of Windows, Video and Photo Editing, Productivity SW. ;-)

Doc,

I think the only Mac you would be happy with would be a used PowerMac G4 Dual CPU tower. That is the one I like for myself anyways. Other people could care less that it has the ability to stick in 6 HDDs, upgrade the CPUs, stick in PCI cards, etc. But that is expected.

dyt4000
02-02-2006, 04:03 PM
To get back on topic, you could always go to the library, check out cds and then burn and return!