RIAA v Howell cleanup

[Chris Gehlker]

On Jan 12, 2008, at 2:58 PM, Marvin O Fretwell wrote:

> Why the RIAA's "new found" reticence to say copying your own music  
> is not a copyright violation?
> Perhaps because their lawyers have recently advised them to quit  
> saying it; for some convoluted legal reason?

That's what their spokesman said.

In a 2006 letter to the copyright office, one of the submitters,  
presumably the RIAA, makes a curious comment. They defend DRM schemes  
on CDs on the grounds that they could be effective in preventing file  
sharing but also on the grounds that there aren't any access controls  
that prevent ripping. The letter is available here.
<http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/riaa-believes-m.html>
The weird comments are on pages 31 and 32.

>
> It is curious, because in the past, the RIAA certainly has openly  
> said personal copying was okay with them (even great!).
> Take a look at this archive of their "Ask the RIAA" Q&A.

Sony  was already successfully sued for their 'Root Kit' DRM. Could it  
be that by admitting that ripping is a right they would  be opening  
themselves up to further lawsuits?

I stand by my guess that Sony and maybe others are taking a radical  
position and that at least some companies within the RIAA want to be  
more reasonable. The result  is that the RIAA won't say anything  
straightforward.

--
The fundamental delusion of humanity is to suppose that I am here and  
you are out there
  -Yasutani Roshi, Zen master (1885-1973)