If downloadable songs (and this is from ALL download sites) specifically do not give you the right to use the song for which you bought a license to use under the terms of that license, for the purpose of creating a ringtone, then you do NOT have that right.
I thought I said this in the part you quoted, I'm puzzled how you missed it. Did you read what I wrote?
I really don't buy from iTunes or otherwise download music, so it's not going to be a problem, I'm not going to be violating the EULA. But, as you say, the terms of the EULA don't cover CDs, and most of what I wrote about covered CDs.
The only thing that I get out of your post is a semantics issue, buying & licencing and all that, you are right on that, but I knew it was a license all along, but the terminology of buying is pervasive, so I might make the mistake. Even on iTunes, the button says "Buy". I know it's a license.
I thought I said this in the part you quoted, I'm puzzled how you missed it. Did you read what I wrote?
I really don't buy from iTunes or otherwise download music, so it's not going to be a problem, I'm not going to be violating the EULA. But, as you say, the terms of the EULA don't cover CDs, and most of what I wrote about covered CDs.
The only thing that I get out of your post is a semantics issue, buying & licencing and all that, you are right on that, but I knew it was a license all along, but the terminology of buying is pervasive, so I might make the mistake. Even on iTunes, the button says "Buy". I know it's a license.
It's tough to know what people mean.
I get upset about violating copyright and license because it's happened to me, and my cousins, who are songwriters. The estimates are that they lose about 30% of their income to broken license agreements, not just by individuals, but also by small radio stations who are supposed to collect the data of everything the play, and sent in the money, but don't.
Think about it, you work for years to finally get a contract, perhaps have a couple concerts, and now thousands love your music and are paying for CDs and music downloads. However, just when your new hit song or album grows up the charts, you're hearing others setting your songs to ringtones on a fast growing industry (cell phones) or using as backgrounds on their web pages, etc., and you don't get another dime? They should be free to use it at will? They paid for your song or album and can digitally splice and dice your words, music, and more how they please on whatever device that plays sound? Really, if that was your way of making a living, would you really embrace the idea that it should be free?
For what it's worth, apparently the band doesn't get any royalties from the ring tones.
"unfortunately--what the RIAA actually won in the case cited by Engadget was instead the right to collect money for ringtones without distributing those fees to the artists they represent. "
Anyway, this situation looks to be far more complex than either of us had considered.
For what it's worth, apparently the band doesn't get any royalties from the ring tones.
"unfortunately--what the RIAA actually won in the case cited by Engadget was instead the right to collect money for ringtones without distributing those fees to the artists they represent. "
Anyway, this situation looks to be far more complex than either of us had considered.
It's basically a good article, except that the quote is out of context, and the last section of the article is again, as it often is with him, a bit hysterical.
Comments
If downloadable songs (and this is from ALL download sites) specifically do not give you the right to use the song for which you bought a license to use under the terms of that license, for the purpose of creating a ringtone, then you do NOT have that right.
I thought I said this in the part you quoted, I'm puzzled how you missed it. Did you read what I wrote?
I really don't buy from iTunes or otherwise download music, so it's not going to be a problem, I'm not going to be violating the EULA. But, as you say, the terms of the EULA don't cover CDs, and most of what I wrote about covered CDs.
The only thing that I get out of your post is a semantics issue, buying & licencing and all that, you are right on that, but I knew it was a license all along, but the terminology of buying is pervasive, so I might make the mistake. Even on iTunes, the button says "Buy". I know it's a license.
I thought I said this in the part you quoted, I'm puzzled how you missed it. Did you read what I wrote?
I really don't buy from iTunes or otherwise download music, so it's not going to be a problem, I'm not going to be violating the EULA. But, as you say, the terms of the EULA don't cover CDs, and most of what I wrote about covered CDs.
The only thing that I get out of your post is a semantics issue, buying & licencing and all that, you are right on that, but I knew it was a license all along, but the terminology of buying is pervasive, so I might make the mistake. Even on iTunes, the button says "Buy". I know it's a license.
It's tough to know what people mean.
I get upset about violating copyright and license because it's happened to me, and my cousins, who are songwriters. The estimates are that they lose about 30% of their income to broken license agreements, not just by individuals, but also by small radio stations who are supposed to collect the data of everything the play, and sent in the money, but don't.
Think about it, you work for years to finally get a contract, perhaps have a couple concerts, and now thousands love your music and are paying for CDs and music downloads. However, just when your new hit song or album grows up the charts, you're hearing others setting your songs to ringtones on a fast growing industry (cell phones) or using as backgrounds on their web pages, etc., and you don't get another dime? They should be free to use it at will? They paid for your song or album and can digitally splice and dice your words, music, and more how they please on whatever device that plays sound? Really, if that was your way of making a living, would you really embrace the idea that it should be free?
For what it's worth, apparently the band doesn't get any royalties from the ring tones.
"unfortunately--what the RIAA actually won in the case cited by Engadget was instead the right to collect money for ringtones without distributing those fees to the artists they represent. "
Anyway, this situation looks to be far more complex than either of us had considered.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Tec...right_Law.html
For what it's worth, apparently the band doesn't get any royalties from the ring tones.
"unfortunately--what the RIAA actually won in the case cited by Engadget was instead the right to collect money for ringtones without distributing those fees to the artists they represent. "
Anyway, this situation looks to be far more complex than either of us had considered.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Tec...right_Law.html
It's basically a good article, except that the quote is out of context, and the last section of the article is again, as it often is with him, a bit hysterical.
Another good article is from MacWorld:
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/09...ones/index.php
The complexity is what I've tried to explain to people without writing pages of information down.