Re: Article on new tape trading laws (No Zep)

[jacqueb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Grant Burgess wrote:

> Anything in a courtroom is possible, if the jurors in the OJ case could not
> be convinced that OJ killed his wife, why couldn't the judicial system by
> this story.

Well, for starters, I would hope the intelligent quotient would be much
higher
 *and* it's not "Hollyweird". If a "judge" is going to hear the case, or
finally
the Supreme Court, you can just rest assured that you aren't going to
get away
with as many tricks, Grant. Granted, the higher level courts aren't
triers of fact,
but they look at the "law" involved & how it is applied. It wouldn't
fly.

Grant:
> The thing to do would be to buy a few "high priced" cassettes at a
> convenience store, keep the reciept and if you are accussed of making a
> profit from the music, you can say "what profit?".

My point is, "why call attention to yourself in the first place?" Be
discrete.
Take your list down from your webpages and wait til this "scare", as you
put it,
is over. I don't know about you, but I do not wish to be the test case,
or
legal precedent involving tape trades. I don't wish to have my material
seized as a "trial" goes on.
 
Grant:
> In Theolyn's case of giving pot away with a very high priced pack of
> baggies, that would be a little harder to argue. It's one thing to mark up a
> tape by $1 or $2 and justify it and it's another thing to say that a box of
> baggies could be sold for $200.

Sure, this is correct and it was a flimsy analogy, but your argument
just
won't hold water in court. If you were brazen, they'd still come after
you, now matter
how many "loopholes" you'd try to throw up.

> But seriously folks, what does really matter is not what laws are on the
> books, but how the laws are enforced. Until a precedent is set, the law
> really doesn't exist.

Well, sure it does! :-) A law is a law, and it seems like the RIAA has a
big boner to come after people, let's not be blase (insert accent) about
it.

 
> I think the RIAA will try to flex their muscles a bit for a while and then
> the scare will go away. It really does take the artist to get involved in
> the complaint process for the law to mean anything.

Nope. I'm not talking about P/P, particularly, but whoever *owns the
rights,*
and would be violated by the infringement of the intellectual property,
etc,
is who counts. 

I hope this helps to throw light the faulty theory of "If P/P allowed a
taper's section,
therefore ALL traders of *Zeppelin* material are "safe" from the RIAA
because
the artists encourage trading."  It would be a good arguing point in
court if you 
had to defend yourself, but would only apply to P/P material. And if
many of
the band, Led Zeppelin, sold their rights (to Atlantic, for instance)
then if Atlantic wants to stick you, you're fucked.


Love,
Theolyn