Ringtone Piracy : Eminem Sues

[adrian]

Source (http://www.phonemag.com/index.php/weblog/10082005_ringtone_piracy_eminem_sues/)

Just as the music artists and the entertainment industry is coming to terms with music piracy and free downloads, Ringtone piracy is on the rise with songs being converted to ringtones and sold without explicit permission from the artists. Eminem is the latest in the fray to sue.

According to the Associated Press, Eminem’s publishers filed a complaint against 5 ringtone firms on charges that they are using Eminem’s songs as ringtones and selling them in the market without explicit permission from the artist. The lawsuit filed in US District Court in Detroit includes the following 5 firms : Matrix M LLC, Cellus USA, FanMobile, MyPhoneFiles and Nextones.com

As per The Register, Eminem has been in the news over a similar copyright infringement issue over an advert show in MTV and on apple.com, which includedd a boy singing part of Eminem’s song “Lost Yourself” . The case was resolved through an out of court settlement.

The Ringtone download business is starting to catch up in the US markets, with more handsets coming equipped with polyphonic ringtone and MP3 capabilities. As per a research report from Ipsos Insight published earlier this year:

“Findings from the latest edition of TEMPO, Ipsos Insight’s quarterly study of digital music behaviors since 2002, reveal that nearly one-quarter (23%) of American mobile phone owners have downloaded ringtones to their mobile phones. This translates into approximately 30 million Americans within the current U.S. population, and marks a dramatic increase over the past 12 months, when only 5% of mobile phone owners had downloaded ringtones.”

On the other hand, statistics show that the percentage of paid subscribers for mobile ringtones is higher than that for music download, due to lack of non-paid downloads. The same report mentions :

“In contrast to PC-based music downloading, where file-sharing has siphoned potential users from fee-based services, mobile phone owners are much more likely to have paid for the ringtones they download, despite higher fees relative to buying a full song through a service such as Apple’s iTunes. In the Spring 2005 wave of TEMPO, 78% of mobile phone owners had paid to download a ringtone, while 50% of PC-based downloaders report having paid.”

However, as mentioned in this news article, the piracy could be at the source ringtone publishing company rather than at the consumer end. Currently there are no measures of protecting redistribution on music content via ringtones, except for download restrictions that can be put on this content. The RIAA..are you listening?

--------------------

So far, I only paid for 5 ringtones for my 3 or so phones, but that's because I didn't have a data cable for it. Now I can put full songs onto the phones and don't even have to pay a thing (unless I get it from itunes or something). If providers want to get people to pay for ringtones, they better start offering some good sounding 'tones, instead of AM quality sounds.

[craigwatanabe]

It's ironic for a guy who demonstrates so much anti-establisment hatred in his lyrics, to use the establishment to protect his corporate-greedy wallet.

Steal from the rich give to the poor. Hey wait a minute I'm one of the rich now that my music went gold and them assholes are stealing from me so the poor can have a cool ringtone.

So Eminem how does it feel to be a victim of your own success and values. :D


I'm sorry I got no sympathy for guys like Eminem. But none the less, piracy is piracy and I don't condone what happened either, but it's just fun to see a hypocrite stew in his own hatred once in a while. Burn Baby Burn!!! Oops wrong Genre. :eek:

[zztype]

But none the less, piracy is piracy and I don't condone what happened either, but it's just fun to see a hypocrite stew in his own hatred once in a while. Burn Baby Burn!!! Oops wrong Genre. :eek:

But wait a minute, what you guys are talking about is not piracy, specifically. If I purchase a 25 Cent CD, I am allowed to play the music on that CD on any music-playing device that I choose. I don't care WHAT the record companies say, don't believe them. When you buy an artist's music, you have certain RIGHTS to listen to that music that they cannot modify. They cannot pick and choose what you play the music on.

So if I rip that CD into my iTunes and put it on my iPod to listen to it, THAT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL AND PERMISSIBLE under the law. Ditto if I take the CD track and rip it to a ringtone for playback on my personal cell phone. It's none of their business.

When I take that ringtone and stick it on my web site, offering to sell it to someone else, or even to post it for free download, THEN I have done something illegal.

Let's not forget that we have certain rights when we pay these guys for their music.

[Glen Miyashiro]

What OS(es) do cell phones use? They're not open source are they?

[zztype]

No, but I found this neat little $20 shareware app called "Xingtone" that will digitize ANY sound and send it to your phone!!! Go google um, no?! :)

What OS(es) do cell phones use? They're not open source are they?

[adrian]

No, but I found this neat little $20 shareware app called "Xingtone" that will digitize ANY sound and send it to your phone!!! Go google um, no?! :)
But then again, who needs to pay for something like that when there's open source software that will do it for free?

[craigwatanabe]

But wait a minute, what you guys are talking about is not piracy, specifically. If I purchase a 25 Cent CD, I am allowed to play the music on that CD on any music-playing device that I choose. I don't care WHAT the record companies say, don't believe them. When you buy an artist's music, you have certain RIGHTS to listen to that music that they cannot modify. They cannot pick and choose what you play the music on.

So if I rip that CD into my iTunes and put it on my iPod to listen to it, THAT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL AND PERMISSIBLE under the law. Ditto if I take the CD track and rip it to a ringtone for playback on my personal cell phone. It's none of their business.

When I take that ringtone and stick it on my web site, offering to sell it to someone else, or even to post it for free download, THEN I have done something illegal.

And I'd be careful when expounding on what is perfectly legal and permissible under the law. The law states that you cannot do what you implied. When you rip a CD and put it on your cellphone, that is illegal under the federal copyright laws. Just because you don't believe in the laws it doesn't mean it's legal.

Heck I don't believe my BMW should be restricted to 55 MPH! That doesn't mean in my eyes driving 150 MPH is perfectly legan and permissible...it ain't and I'll go to jail if I try to prove the cop wrong.

The whole point is that in purchasing that song legally, you agreed not to duplicate it for whatever reasons that implied contract stipulates. Voiding that agreement is grounds for a lawsuit and you will lose, plain and simple.

So how do you get around that legal hurdle? Steal the music then you can only be prosecuted for stealing the CD but you cannot be convicted of music pirating because you never bought the CD which would have activated that implied contract. :D You'll still go to jail but the offense as a shoplifter is lesser than a felony conviction of music piracy...cheaper to get out of jail too I think. :D

Let's not forget that we have certain rights when we pay these guys for their music.

It's not a matter of not caring...when you buy a recording of a song, there are those "fine print" disclaimers that tell you that you cannot duplicate this recording. Buying that CD is an implied contract agreeing to those terms. Violating those terms is grounds for prosecution to the fullest extent. And you agreed to it by virtue of the purchase.

Your "certain rights" is simply to be able to play it on the device it was intended to be played on in that media. You don't have any rights regarding multigenerational duplication. Absolutely none...and...in purchasing the song...you agreed to it. Read the fine print.

[Glen Miyashiro]

It's not a matter of not caring...when you buy a recording of a song, there are those "fine print" disclaimers that tell you that you cannot duplicate this recording. Buying that CD is an implied contract agreeing to those terms. Violating those terms is grounds for prosecution to the fullest extent. And you agreed to it by virtue of the purchase.

Your "certain rights" is simply to be able to play it on the device it was intended to be played on in that media. You don't have any rights regarding multigenerational duplication. Absolutely none...and...in purchasing the song...you agreed to it. Read the fine print.Except that contractual agreements can be overridden if it is found that the contract goes against the law. That's the argument that I think is being made: that these contractual restrictions are not legal. I'm not an IP law expert but I do know the difference between a contract and a statute.

[zztype]

The record companies are fighting mightily to distance a CD from a sound recording. In the past they didn't care, as their source material, records or cassette tapes, didn't allow for high-quality duplication.

With the advent of CD digital, it became possible to duplicate the original without apparent loss of quality.

When you buy blank cassette, reel-to-reel tape, videotape, blank CDs, blank DVDs, some of what you are paying goes to the movie and recording industries as royalties. This was granted to compensate them for duplicated copies of their originals.

But now that the copies are so good, they want to change the law to make it "illegal" to copy at all, denying consumers fair use of their purchased products. The MPAA and RIAA are lobbying mightily and they are trying things like changing the CD format so that it can't be called a "CD" and saying that by copying their non-CD, you are circumventing their copy protection. I call bullsh*t.

Again, the whole deal centers around public performance and redistribution of the copies. What you do in your own home with the audio and video recordings you legally purchase (license) is your own business. When you run into trouble is when you allow others to have access to those materials without also paying for their license.

http://www.copyright.gov

[mel]

For the reasons stated above by Blaine, that is why I still prefer to buy music on CD vs. music from the iTunes Store. As generous as Apple's Fairplay DRM software is, buying a non-copy protected CD gives you the most freedom to make compilation CDs, cassette tapes or ripping them to MP3s for use in your computer and iPods.

With all of this stuff happening these days, it is a good thing that I held on to many of my old LPs and 45s which are all none copy protected and can easily be converted to digital for my personal use.

As for ringtones, they're a non-issue for me since I don't own a cell phone. :) Still I think people should have the freedom to use their music on the devices they want to use it on, whether it be a cell phone, iPod, MP3 encoded CD, cassette tape or whatever.

[Konaguy]

It's not a matter of not caring...when you buy a recording of a song, there are those "fine print" disclaimers that tell you that you cannot duplicate this recording. Buying that CD is an implied contract agreeing to those terms. Violating those terms is grounds for prosecution to the fullest extent. And you agreed to it by virtue of the purchase.

Your "certain rights" is simply to be able to play it on the device it was intended to be played on in that media. You don't have any rights regarding multigenerational duplication. Absolutely none...and...in purchasing the song...you agreed to it. Read the fine print.

Craig, have you heard of "fair use". It allows you record or "time shift" on to
VCR or DVD Recorder. The same thing applies to CDs and software. You can
make a backup copy as long as you still have the original copy.There is exceptions though. Due the DMCA you legally cannot make backup copies
of DVDs. As DVDs have CSS copy protection. The DMCA bars any breaking of
copy protections.

http://www.macworld.com/2001/10/macbeat/rip/
http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php

[zztype]

It's not a matter of not caring...when you buy a recording of a song, there are those "fine print" disclaimers that tell you that you cannot duplicate this recording. Buying that CD is an implied contract agreeing to those terms. Violating those terms is grounds for prosecution to the fullest extent. And you agreed to it by virtue of the purchase.

Your "certain rights" is simply to be able to play it on the device it was intended to be played on in that media. You don't have any rights regarding multigenerational duplication. Absolutely none...and...in purchasing the song...you agreed to it. Read the fine print.

Hey Craig,

I did go "read the fine print." Do you know what it says? I have a whole stack of CDs here. The "fine print" in question on most of these CDs says:

"Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws."

Do you know what that means? It says basically, that if you unlawfully duplicate the album, it is a violation of some law, someplace. To paraphrase, "If you break the law, that's against the law."

It does NOT say you cannot duplicate the CD. It says you cannot duplicate the CD outside the limits of applicable law; you would then be breaking the law, you know.

I do not know what "the law" exactly says, that I might quote it, but the law DOES say that you may make copies for your own use in your own home, on your own equipment.

Stating that you could play an album only on a CD player is sort of like saying "you can only legally use our gasoline in SUVs." That's absolutely ridiculous. You can use the gasoline you purchase in any vehicle you choose.

And I can play the music I purchase on any equipment I want to. I paid them money for the right to listen to the music, and that's what I intend to do.

I do not intend to share their music with others (for free or otherwise), only to listen to it on my own premises, on my own equipment.

Blaine

[craigwatanabe]

You are correct. I guess what I meant (spin doctor in effect) was that duplication for the intent of distribution outside of personal use.

That's basically what "applicable laws" mean where as you can duplicate it for your own personal use, however once it goes beyond personal (meaning your own) use, then it becomes a violation of applicable laws.


These laws were aimed at those who use pre-recorded material for public use/entertainment whereas income can be generated from the use of those copyrighted material.

One example is of course mobile DJ operators who use records to spin at a grad party and don't pay for commercial use of a product intended for domestic playback.

Another is when a hair salon uses a radio as background music piped throughout their inhouse PA system. If the radio is being used by itself with no external amplification or with unattached speakers sold with the unit (like bookshelf systems) then there is an exclusion to those laws regarding use.

However if you have a radio and you plug in speakers that didn't come with the radio on purchase and you string up those speakers throughout your hair salon and you didn't pay BMI or ASCAP the extortion fee they demand, then you are in violation of applicable laws.

It's like splitting hairs but that's how copyright laws get you. If you get a ringtone that is normally paid for off the net from somebody that posted it for all to use, that person can be convicted of a felony offense. If you knowingly receive that download you can be held for knowingly receiving stolen goods and that's also a violation of applicable laws.

For personal use is okay and if you bought the music and recorded it for that reason then that's also okay.

I stand corrected. :(

[mel]

I remember we had this discussion last year or 2 years ago on the old Hawaii Radio & Television Guide message board. Perhaps now the public performance laws are enforced more stringently than before. I don't know. But long, long ago in my youth, when I was working at the local "Village Pharmacy" in Waimea on the Big Island, we played radio music through our stereo system for use as background noise and no one complained, the copyright police never showed up, etc., etc.

I also still maintain the the airwaves belong to the public and we have the right to play the radio wherever we please as long as we are not disturbing the peace. The signal comes from out of the air for free and the radio station is already paying the BMI and ASCAP highway robbery fees.

But then I can see why those organizations want to get more money every step of the way. Steve Jobs is correct. They are GREEDY.

Long, long ago I was one of those "mobile DJs" and we just got our records and played em at a few dances. Never made a career out of that, but I was only in it mainly for the fun and it was nice to get a few $$ along the way. Afterward I made a little more money shooting prom pictures and weddings. That was better than mobile DJ.

[craigwatanabe]

Hey Mel, I think me and my friend Dexter started the Mobile DJ trend in Hawaii. Back in 1977 we formed a company called "Shaka Sounds-of Hawaii" and we slip-cued and scratch cued many records for high schools on the same turntables used today...the venerable Techniques SL-1200 MKII. Back then they cost only $270 each. Those turntables have been so successfull they won a design award. 20-years later the same turntable was on the market for almost twice the price, now I hear the MKII's have finally been replaced twice over in the last few years.

But back to the topic...I say too bad for Eminem even if he wins, he got a taste of his own foulness. :p

[mel]

I did that mobile DJ thing off and on for about 4 years.... it helped me get some extra money when I was in college. Did mostly church dances and some private parties.

Yes, those Technics turntables were top of the line back then. You know anyone who likes old vinyl and turntables have to give credit to the rap music industry for keeping the technology alive. If it weren't for rappers and scratchers, finding a new turntable these days would be as hard as finding an 8-track player.

OK... this is like way off topic.... ringtones, ringtones.... did I hear any recently? Oh yeah, I don't own a cell phone. Since I am not a big fan of Eminem, whatever he deserves, I agree with you Craig.

[craigwatanabe]

I think if I ever heard an Eminem ringtone eminating from a cell phone, I'd tell the guy I think his ringer's broken cuz all I can hear is crap coming outta that little speaker.

I'd like a ringtone that says: Help me Help me!!! in a shrill little voice. Can you imagine that coming out of your purse or pocket? :D