What are your questions on downloading & copying music legally?

Former_MSE_Archna

The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) - the British record industry's trade organisation - has agreed to answers MSE's questions on legal music sharing.

So what do you want to know?

Eg. Is it legal to copy your CD to your MP3 player?
Can you record the top 40 and listen back?
Can you lend a mate your favourite Take That/Foo Fighters album?

List your questions here, we'll get answers and publish them in the weekly email (www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips)

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

sassi

Can you download an album from the internet (such as via bittorrent) to your PC if you own a copy already on CD?

Watto1990

When are you going to drop the ridiculous idea that every single illegal download is automatically a lost sale, and using that to calculate your "losses", when most people who illegally download have never and will never step foot in a record shop, buy an album or pay for a download?

Soubrette

Is it legal or illegal to listen to streamed music - even if the source of that music is illegal? For example if you were listening to a pirate radio broadcast on your computer (ie one which was not paying fees to record companies) are you breaking the law by listening?

Thanks

Sou

Old_Wrinkly

Ask BPI :
"When are you going to stop living in the Twentieth Century?"

And if I want to know what is legal, I'll look at the law for myself, not ask a body with a vested interest in twisting the law.

Cabbagewhite

My question is not about legal downloading as such, but I have always wondered how the money paid is split between retailer, artist, writer, record company, etc.? As tunechecker shows, there can be a big difference between the cost of the same track or album from different retailers, is the split a fixed amount or a percentage cut? Thanks.

kittykatchez

If legal downloading costs the same as having the physical CD delivered (Which from many retailers it does), what is the incentive to download legally - make it a fair price and more people will pay it.

Also I completely agree with Watto1990 - there us a lot of music that I'd have on my ipod if I could get it for free, that I would never even consider spending my money on!

S_t_e_v_e

Why do the Performing Rights Society insist we need a licence to listen to the radio in our small office? All the employees have their own TV/Radio licences and the radio station pays royalties to play songs. Surely they are trying to charge for something that has already been paid for by the broadcaster. Wouldn't it make sense for them to chase the broadcasters for royalties not the listeners of background music at work.

[Deleted User]

If you download a song with DRM, is it OK to un-DRM the track for your own personal use, if the MP3 player you have doesn't support DRM?

BJones

A few facts:
2008 was a record year for the number of singles sold, only for that record to be broken by October the following year.

Numerous results of research shows that people who download music buy more albums than those that do not download, (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3052145).

Many of the singer-songwriters in the charts today were not found by the record companies but were discovered and made popular by promoting their own efforts using You Tube and social networking sites.

The price of downloaded tracks are more expensive in the UK than many other countries (using iTunes as an example), a price agreed with the UK recording industry.

Knowing this; how can you defend your argument that sharing tracks is hurting music? Isn't it more accurate to say that the way people are accessing music no longer fits within an outdated business and distribution model that the BPI has tried to enforce with decreasing effectiveness?

Also, The Digital Economy Bill, a bill largely written by the BPI and lobbied for strongly (the final bill contained large portions of text copied exactly from the lobby documents), is not fit for purpose as the EU has already said that access to the internet should be considered a fundamental human right, a sentiment echoed by the UN.
Almost four in five people around the world believe that access to the internet is a fundamental right, (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8548190).
The technology to avoid detection has been used widely, and legitimately, for many years therefore anyone with a modicum of knowledge will not be affected directly by the law.

What the bill does do is:
Introduces the concept that everyone is guilty until you prove yourself innocent, without any access to assistance from the legal aid system.
No proof is needed to punish a person, only a suspicion or accusation is required.
If one user is suspected of downloading a file, everyone who uses that connection could loose access to the internet. It is to be proved though litigation whether this will affect free wi-fi areas and communal public connections.

With the bill now made law, how does the BPI intend to reduce the level of illegal downloading by the desired drop of 70%. What monitoring is, or will be, in place and has this monitoring been shown to comply with the human rights act and any UK privacy considerations?

Finally, if the reduction of 70% is achieved, how will we, the wider populous, benefit?

julie777

Is it correct to say that any download for which you do NOT pay is illegal?
Also, if you ARE paying, does that automatically make it legal?