Mortal sin to download, keep, and use mp3s?

[The_Otaku]

I have a follow up question(s). I won’t be long winded about it, I promise.

If I buy a song (mp3) online, through lets say, i tunes for example, I am considered to legally own a copy of that song, and I can use it for personal use.

Can someone please define personal use and tell me if it would apply to this situation:

If I take said legal mp3, and put it into a video I create (in this case a tutorial on how to draw for example) and the mp3 song serves as background music while you listen to me give you instructions, and this video is uploaded to my youtube account, where others can obviously freely watch the tutorial at any time as many times as they want, add the video to their youtube collection, and share the video with others, is this legal?

My understanding is that it would be, since radio stations broadcast songs (like the oldies for example) all day every day, and I highly doubt they ask every artist every day if they can use that piece of music. I’m assuming they work under fair use of some kind and they somehow paid a royalty in putting the songs on their computer servers for a DJ to mix, so isn’t what I’d be doing in making videos that have songs in them sort of the same thing or is it something completely different?

Where they’re similar is that neither I nor the radio station make any money, and the song itself, while it could be recorded with a recording device, cannot be ‘downloaded’ as such since it’s been integrated into the video, nor is it being shared with the intent for it to be downloaded and distributed (though in the case of youtube, people could link others to the videos or link it off-site if I’ve enabled that option). If someone does separate the audio from the video and makes an mp3 from that, isn’t that their sin since they’re the ones tampering with my video?

If I did what I just said with an ILLEGAL copy of the mp3, then it would be wrong, but is it ok if to do the above provided I paid for that song? Does this count as “personal use” AND fair use or only one or the other, but not both?

Thanks again!

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

No, what I’m talking about are third party sites created for free and are free of charge, by regular people who host the mp3 files for download and you get your mp3s from sites such as these. Or, sometimes someone will have them on their own website, and they will be embedded in the page, so you hear it when you open their webpage, but somewhere there’s a link for you to download it, etc, etc, etc.

If that is the case, yes, it is stealing and therefor illegal. Sites with free downloads exist on the technicality that users may (or should) already own the content they are downloading.

Sites that embed music, such as MySpace, have permission to do so. You however do not have permission to download it unless the creator gives it to you. If you do help yourself to the files without permission, it’s stealing. Since that’d be a consious decision, it’s sin and worthy of a confessional trip.

 

[The_Otaku]

If that is the case, yes, it is stealing and therefor illegal. Sites with free downloads exist on the technicality that users may (or should) already own the content they are downloading.

Sites that embed music, such as MySpace, have permission to do so. You however do not have permission to download it unless the creator gives it to you. If you do help yourself to the files without permission, it’s stealing. Since that’d be a consious decision, it’s sin and worthy of a confessional trip.

How come MySpace has permission? Do they somehow pay royalties? If not, why are they given an exclusive right like this?

Also, if it’s not too much trouble, could you answer my most recent post (before this one) if you have time? Thanks.

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

I have a follow up question(s). I won’t be long winded about it, I promise.

If I buy a song (mp3) online, through lets say, i tunes for example, I am considered to legally own a copy of that song, and I can use it for personal use.

Can someone please define personal use and tell me if it would apply to this situation:

If I take said legal mp3, and put it into a video I create (in this case a tutorial on how to draw for example) and the mp3 song serves as background music while you listen to me give you instructions, and this video is uploaded to my youtube account, where others can obviously freely watch the tutorial at any time as many times as they want, add the video to their youtube collection, and share the video with others, is this legal?

My understanding is that it would be, since radio stations broadcast songs (like the oldies for example) all day every day, and I highly doubt they ask every artist every day if they can use that piece of music. I’m assuming they work under fair use of some kind and they somehow paid a royalty in putting the songs on their computer servers for a DJ to mix, so isn’t what I’d be doing in making videos that have songs in them sort of the same thing or is it something completely different?

Where they’re similar is that neither I nor the radio station make any money, and the song itself, while it could be recorded with a recording device, cannot be ‘downloaded’ as such since it’s been integrated into the video, nor is it being shared with the intent for it to be downloaded and distributed (though in the case of youtube, people could link others to the videos or link it off-site if I’ve enabled that option). If someone does separate the audio from the video and makes an mp3 from that, isn’t that their sin since they’re the ones tampering with my video?

If I did what I just said with an ILLEGAL copy of the mp3, then it would be wrong, but is it ok if to do the above provided I paid for that song? Does this count as “personal use” AND fair use or only one or the other, but not both?

Thanks again!

According to Section 13, paragraph A or the iTunes Terms of Use, “…you will not use such proprietary information or materials in any way whatsoever except for use of the Service in compliance with the terms of this Agreement.”

Chapter 9, paragraph B states the usage rules which do not include using any iTunes media for outlets such as YouTube.

An important thing to remeber about iTunes and vendors like it are you do NOT own the music. iTunes does. What you are actually agreeing to in the Terms of Use is how you are allowed to use their materials. In fact, they can delete (if they want to) any and all items you have purchased at any time.

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

How come MySpace has permission? Do they somehow pay royalties? If not, why are they given an exclusive right like this?

Also, if it’s not too much trouble, could you answer my most recent post (before this one) if you have time? Thanks.

MySpace doesn’'t have to pay royalties, actually. In their Terms of Use, the owners of MySpace explain that any media license provided by the said media’s creators is non-exclusive.

Chapter 6, section 1, paragraph 2 states precisely how music posting works on MySpace:

“The license you grant to MySpace.com is non-exclusive (meaning you are free to license your Content to anyone else in addition to MySpace.com), fully-paid and royalty-free (meaning that MySpace.com is not required to pay you for the use on the MySpace Services of the Content that you post), sublicensable (so that MySpace.com is able to use its affiliates and subcontractors such as Internet content delivery networks to provide the MySpace Services), and worldwide (because the Internet and the MySpace Services are global in reach). This license will terminate at the time you remove your Content from the MySpace Services. The license does not grant MySpace.com the right to sell your Content, nor does the license grant MySpace.com the right to distribute your Content outside of the MySpace Services.”

People or companies who want to promote their products can do so through mediums like MySpace so long as they agree to MySpace’s terms.

 

[The_Otaku]

According to Section 13, paragraph A or the iTunes Terms of Use, “…you will not use such proprietary information or materials in any way whatsoever except for use of the Service in compliance with the terms of this Agreement.”

Chapter 9, paragraph B states the usage rules which do not include using any iTunes media for outlets such as YouTube.

An important thing to remeber about iTunes and vendors like it are you do NOT own the music. iTunes does. What you are actually agreeing to in the Terms of Use is how you are allowed to use their materials. In fact, they can delete (if they want to) any and all items you have purchased at any time.

So, the answer is no, then?

I’m trying to read the Terms myself, but the language is confusing me in some areas, and you reference the Terms as section this or that and paragraph this or that, and your technical talk is confusing me, and I’m not sure if I’m reading what you want me to be reading…

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

Haha, sorry. Well, no. You cant use iTunes music legally in your YouTube videos.

There is a legal work-around, however. You can (as in are legally allowed to) burn your iTunes media to a CD. You can then (legally) rip the music from the CD and bam! There you go. Music you can (legally) use in a YouTube video.

The, uh, law doesn’t always make much sense. But, no one said it would.

 

[The_Otaku]

MySpace doesn’'t have to pay royalties, actually. In their Terms of Use, the owners of MySpace explain that any media license provided by the said media’s creators is non-exclusive.

Chapter 6, section 1, paragraph 2 states precisely how music posting works on MySpace:

“The license you grant to MySpace.com is non-exclusive (meaning you are free to license your Content to anyone else in addition to MySpace.com), fully-paid and royalty-free (meaning that MySpace.com is not required to pay you for the use on the MySpace Services of the Content that you post), sublicensable (so that MySpace.com is able to use its affiliates and subcontractors such as Internet content delivery networks to provide the MySpace Services), and worldwide (because the Internet and the MySpace Services are global in reach). This license will terminate at the time you remove your Content from the MySpace Services. The license does not grant MySpace.com the right to sell your Content, nor does the license grant MySpace.com the right to distribute your Content outside of the MySpace Services.”

People or companies who want to promote their products can do so through mediums like MySpace so long as they agree to MySpace’s terms.

But aren’t the myspacers the ones uploading the content? These terms read as if the artists/copyright holders are donating their property or loaning it, when the reality is it’s the users who are uploading these songs without the knowledge of the creators.

So how is this fair? Or am I not getting something? Sorry for being dense.

But if I’m understanding it right, just because it’s some kind of business, the users have immunity because of the nature of the site, but me wanting to post a video with a song in it on youtube is wrong. This doesn’t make sense to me, especially when people can listen to those songs on myspace as many times as they want for free. Yes, they could do the same with my video, but they’d have to watch it again, and that deters them from letting it load again just so they can listen to the song, assuming that’s the only reason they’re watching it (which is a shame, cause I’m trying to teach them how to draw, in the example). The music is just there for ambiance. I realize it’s the same thing with myspace, and it gives “character” and individuality to that person’s page, but the mp3s are streaming in a player which you can cycle through.

Yeah, they’re getting away with it because of this legal mumbo jumbo, but it’s allowing them (the myspace user, not myspace itself) to be alot more blatant about it than I expected to be.

 

[The_Otaku]

Haha, sorry. Well, no. You cant use iTunes music legally in your YouTube videos.

There is a legal work-around, however. You can (as in are legally allowed to) burn your iTunes media to a CD. You can then (legally) rip the music from the CD and bam! There you go. Music you can (legally) use in a YouTube video.

The, uh, law doesn’t always make much sense. But, no one said it would.

Jee wizzz… I have to do all that just to have a legal copy of a song? LOL

They really make it difficult don’t they. And you’re sure this is completely legal, to copy/send/burn the mp3s to a disk?

What about if I send it to my flash drive and then to my computer? Does that count, or MUST it be a cd? The flash drive is my property, as much as a cd would be. Or is it that a physical, tangible copy has to exist first, from which non-tangibles (mp3s) can be taken from? I can see how a flash drive doesn’t cut it, but then why wouldn’t it. It’s just another way to hold content.

I didn’t think it would be this ridiculous…

Thanks, again, for your help!

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

But aren’t the myspacers the ones uploading the content? These terms read as if the artists/copyright holders are donating their property or loaning it, when the reality is it’s the users who are uploading these songs without the knowledge of the creators.

So how is this fair? Or am I not getting something? Sorry for being dense.

The companies that legally own the material in question are MySpacers. The ones who put songs up without permission are MySpacers too.

And* thats *where the whole subject of Account Termination comes into play. People who are caught posting material that is not their own will have their accounts deleted. At that point, the actual creators have the right to, erm, sue you over copyright infringement.

So, no. It’s not fair that users are doing that, but it’s not really any different from taking iTunes content and using it in a YouTube video.

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

Jee wizzz… I have to do all that just to have a legal copy of a song? LOL

They really make it difficult don’t they. And you’re sure this is completely legal, to copy/send/burn the mp3s to a disk?

What about if I send it to my flash drive and then to my computer? Does that count, or MUST it be a cd?

I didn’t think it would be this ridiculous…

Thanks, again, for your help!

Hahaha. Unfortuately, yes, it is that ridiculous. And sadly, iTunes states that you can only burn a CD. In fact, they place a limit of only seven burns per iTunes song. How’s that for ridiculous?

 

[The_Otaku]

Hahaha. Unfortuately, yes, it is that ridiculous. And sadly, iTunes states that you can only burn a CD. In fact, they place a limit of only seven burns per iTunes song. How’s that for ridiculous?

I haven’t used itunes before, obviously, or I’d have more basic knowledge.

So the only way to get the mp3s from their site to your computer is to burn them to a cd? I thought you could send them directly to your ipod, and then to a flash disk or your computer directly, and that it wouldn’t matter whether it’s on a cd or not, since the end result is it’s on your computer as an mp3 file.

So they don’t want you knowing you can legally burn songs off a cd, but they give you a limit of how many burns to put them on? Isn’t that contradictory to their goal? Once I possess the songs legally, they have no control over whether I then take the mp3s off the cd, which you say is legal and then I can use them how I’d want in this case.

Wouldn’t they want me to keep the songs on the cd, or better yet, push for i-pod downloads only so no burning and legal loophole exists?

I’m obviously missing something. X (

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

I haven’t used itunes before, obviously, or I’d have more basic knowledge.

So the only way to get the mp3s from their site to your computer is to burn them to a cd? I thought you could send them directly to your ipod, and then to a flash disk or your computer directly, and that it wouldn’t matter whether it’s on a cd or not, since the end result is it’s on your computer as an mp3 file.

So they don’t want you knowing you can legally burn songs off a cd, but they give you a limit of how many burns to put them on? Isn’t that contradictory to their goal? Once I possess the songs legally, they have no control over whether I then take the mp3s off the cd, which you say is legal and then I can use them how I’d want in this case.

Wouldn’t they want me to keep the songs on the cdor better yet, push for i-pod downloads only?

I’m obviously missing something. X (

If you purchase a CD at the store, media usage is going to be a lot easier for you.

Apple wants you to use iTunes which is why they offer so much support for it. iTunes is the largest successful vendor in its field (being that it offers convenient online purchasing as well as first party support for the most popular media device - the iPod).

So, iTunes lets you burn CDs. Now, I don’t know if they have some special reason for this, but I assume it’s to let users do more with iTunes’ media (in a legal way).

For now, you can rip the CD you made and use the mp3s for your own personal purposes. That’s not to say they they won’t change the terms in the future (which they have the right to do). So someday, you may not be allowed to to even burn CDs.

P.S.: The intended idea is to use the iPod as your primary media player so of course the mp3s you purchase off of iTunes can go straight there. However, iTunes limits how many times you can do this with an mp3 and how many devices it may go to.

 

[The_Otaku]

If you purchase a CD at the store, media usage is going to be a lot easier for you.

Why? I still don’t get the difference between a cd and a flash drive. Why is the cd important over the flash drive? They both do the same thing and one is better at it than the other. How is transferring the mp3s from the cd to the computer more legal and ok to use for my purposes than it is to simply use a flash drive to distribute them to one or multiple computers? Or is it simply that anything that passes through an i-pod to get to the computer is what makes this an issue which requires the cd in the first place to make this legal work-around work? I’m assuming then that itunes doesn’t allow you to download straight to a flash drive.

So, iTunes lets you burn CDs. Now, I don’t know if they have some special reason for this, but I assume it’s to let users do more with iTunes’ media (in a legal way).

For now, you can rip the CD you made and use the mp3s for your own personal purposes. That’s not to say they they won’t change the terms in the future (which they have the right to do). So someday, you may not be allowed to to even burn CDs.

Thanks.

Another thing I don’t get is why you’d ever need to burn the same song more than once (twice if an accident happened). Yet they give you 7 opportunities to do so. Where’s the logic in that? You only need the song once, since it would copied later anyways anytime you upload it to something. You only need one carbon copy from them to do all this…

The only time it makes sense is if you want to create multiple cds with the same song on each of them. Other than that, it’s pointless, and, again, why would you need to do that when you can make the copies yourself? XD

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

As far as reason or fairness are concerned, it simply doesn’t matter so long as the company has legal precedent to decide how you can use their products. And quite certainly, the RIAA is more than happy with iTunes and it’s methods.

The data on an audio CD is not the same as an mp3 on a flash drive. Any music files you choose to burn from iTunes to a CD will be encoded as uncompressed audio. Essentially, it’s not a copying of the files, it’s a changing of them. That’s about as much sense I can put there for audio CD support. (Oh and did I mention that the only way you can legally burn an audio CD containing iTunes music is to use iTunes itself and nothing else.)

 

[The_Otaku]

As far as reason or fairness are concerned, it simply doesn’t matter so long as the company has legal precedent to decide how you can use their products. And quite certainly, the RIAA is more than happy with iTunes and it’s methods.

The data on an audio CD is not the same as an mp3 on a flash drive. Any music files you choose to burn from iTunes to a CD will be encoded as uncompressed audio. Essentially, it’s not a copying of the files, it’s a changing of them. That’s about as much sense I can put there for audio CD support. (Oh and did I mention that the only way you can legally burn an audio CD containing iTunes music is to use iTunes itself and nothing else.)

Thank you very much and God bless you for putting up with me all this time! It’s early morning here and I’m getting to bed, but I needed to put this issue to rest once and for all and know my options, my legal MORAL options that is.

I guess paying 1 buck for 1 song isn’t that bad considering I get to use that song how I want after ripping it from the cd. And it’s not like I’m trying to turn a profit from it or anything, but these people make it so difficult…

Hopefully I’ll be able to find enough of the type of songs I want to make this whole endeavor and moral struggle over this issue worth it. I think God has answered me through you and through this legal option you provide me. I wouldn’t have known it was legal to rip the music from the cds and then use them this way unless someone said something. Thank you.

 

[Jacob_Fenton]

Hey, no problem! There are some of us out there on the net who don’t like the state of the industry and how fishy things can be. I guess I just like to make people aware.

Certainly, anything you may have violated and didn’t know about was all venial sin.

Have a good rest and again, it was no problem. I was more than happy to help.

 

[Deo_Optimo_Maxi]

Hey guys I just wanted to share my opinion about the topic which is more about the music industry other than taking side wheter its a sin or not to download mp3s. But I guess it is.
I personally do download mp3s, sometimes because I just want 1 or 2 tracks of the album, sometimes because the stuff I need is not easy to find in stores. I also buy cds and dvds sometimes.
I find it extremley annoying what is going on with the music industry nowadays. Unfortunatelly like everything else it is about money, and of course the fame which brings more money. 90 percent of todays so called musicians are untalented fakes, they have no idea about how to play on any instruments or how to sing. Without the choir behind them their voice is torture for a good ear. They are “entertainers” they say, and producers pick for the look or the crowd shocking personality instead of talent, while really talented real musicians cant even get heard or interviewed by record companies unless they know someone who knows someone who knows the producer. It might be good for the real musicians anyway so wont get totally exploited by those producers on the long run, and thrown away after they made their money out of them.
There was a time when I was able to distinguish one band or singer from another, but they all sound the same now, it is because they make “music” they think we want to hear instead of what their creative juice drives them to make.
In the last 10 years at least all these entertainers come and go, it is a miracle if they stay for 5 yeats. Where are the todays Elviss or Freddie Mercurys or George Michales, Whitney Houstons etc. The real talent I see nowadays is a few compsers who make the good stuff, like Hans Zimmer, Steve Jablonsky, Alan Silvestry and of course the older ones, John Williams, Ennio Moricone etc.
I see a face on tv now and I cant even recognize wheter its the weather-man or another rap star, a cook or a pop diva.
Of course we worship them as Gods, we buy the same stuff they do, wear the same clothes they do. And they dare to complain that us mortals download their “music”. They have more money than entertainers ever had before. They dont do it for the sake of music or for the love of music, they do it for the money.
I am 100 percent sure if from this moment we would stop paying for music, we would live in a quiet world. Not too many of them would be bothered to pick up their guitar, thus they dont even know how to play on it anyway.
I want to apologize for those musicians who really love music and make good stuff, and some of them have to still stay in the background because they dont have the look or the X factor, and some stupid fake pretend to play their music.
I know that there are a few good musicians around still, and you should keep up with the good work, but the rest of them should get a proper job instead.
I know many of you disagree, because you like todays stuff, but I think they make you like it, anyway.
I love music and i think it is for everyone, not for those with money as a musician sad recently, that downloading is the best thing happened to music ever. Everyone is able to have different gender music for free. Music reaches further away with the help of the internet. Music helps for people to relax to feel better to get away from everyday problems. We should let everyone enjoy it.

 

[JoshR]

Priest told me if its copyrighted then its stealing