SGM BLOGGER GOES TO JAIL!!
Or not. I received an email from Carl Ramsey, owner of All Quartets Radio this morning. It was an informative piece that gave some indication of the legal snares that plague online broadcasters. But the part that perked my ears was a comment that my experiment (namely recording online radio for playing in my car) was technically illegal. (Worthwhile note: Mr. Ramsey didn’t take an aggressive or accusation tone at all; it was a very polite and professional letter.)
I was somewhat taken aback. I knew that it was legal to tape television and broadcast radio for personal use. The 1984 Sony Betamax case, decided by the US Supreme Court no less, made that clear. Is it possible that the rule which applies to broadcasts over the ether are protected, while broadcasts over the Internet are not? (Side note, if the Betamax case had gone the other way, VCRs would have been illegal. This was a big deal.)
No one really knows, as there has not been a landmark decision on this yet. One interesting note though, the top lawyer for the RIAA (That’s the group who’s suing folks for downloading P2P music and who thinks Internet recording should be illegal) gets pretty contradictory in his claims. (A lawyer? Contradicting himself? Whodathunkit) When questioned on Internet radio recording, he commented "It is not legal for anybody to make a copy of something they don't own” But when he was reminded that the Supreme Court said that for personal use, it actually is legal for us to make a copy of things we don’t own, he decided to interpret the Supreme Court’s decision for us. According to Marks, what the Court really meant was that, ok, we could record stuff, but after recording it, we’re only allowed to listen to it ONCE. After we listen (or watch, in the case of television) the program once, we are obligated to delete it. And since that’s clearly not the intent when you record Internet radio, it is illegal.
The obvious problem for Marks is that the Supreme Court did not say that. The obvious problem for me is that they didn’t specifically define what my “personal use” is. My interpretation of “personal use” is that as long as it’s for my, um, personal use, meaning I’m not selling it, rebroadcasting it, copying it and giving it away, etc., then I’m ok. Those examples are clearly not “personal use” and are in fact illegal. Marks interpretation of “personal use” is “You can listen to it once, and then you must delete it.” Who is right? Well, until the courts clarify what they meant by “personal use”, you’re going to have to make you own mind up. I think I’m gonna roll the dice on this one.
- posted by SGM Blogger @ 5:39 PM or here to Email me