[UK] From 1 June 2014 it will be legal to rip CDs you own

[Arthur]

Further details can be found on the IPO website. It's not just CDs either.

 

Source: Intellectual Property Office (via Ars Technica)

 

An update to UK copyright law means that from June 1, 2014 it will no longer be illegal to make copies of CDs—or e-books or any other media—that you have bought for personal use.

 

According to current law, it is actually illegal to copy a CD for backup or to play the music on an MP3 player or mobile. It's also illegal to format shift an e-book you've bought from one device to another. Under new exceptions to copyright law, first initiated by the 2011 Hargreaves Review, people will be no longer be committing a crime by format shifting copies of CDs, e-books, or films they have bought.

 

It will remain, however, illegal to make copies at home for friends and family. (So no passing on those ripped CDs, people!) If you want to give the CD to a loved one, you should make sure you delete any personal copies you have made from it, explains the Intellectual Property Office (IPO).

 

Intriguingly, the IPO says that if anti-copying technology (DRM) is too restrictive, consumers can raise a complaint with the Secretary of State. This has been part of the law for more than 25 years (in Section 296ZE of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), but with the new exceptions, there may be more cause for complaint. If a user complains that they cannot benefit from the exception due to a "technological measure" (DRM), the Secretary of State is empowered to "give directions to copyright owners to enable the complainant to benefit from it". That is to say, a movie studio may be forced to make it easier for individuals to copy their DVDs for personal use.

 

Changes to copyright law

The government is making a series of small but important changes to copyright law to make it better suited for the digital age. These changes will affect how you can use content like books, music, films and photographs. They will also introduce greater freedoms in copyright law to allow third parties to use copyright works for a variety of economically and/or socially valuable purposes without the need to seek permission from copyright owners. Protections for the interests of copyright owners and creators are built in to the proposed changes.

 

The government is committed to achieving strong, sustainable and balanced growth that is shared across the country and between industries. These changes are the result of extensive consultation with all interested parties. They will come into force on 1 June 2014.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Arthur

[X-13]

I wonder if this extends to games as well...

[Arthur]

I wonder if this extends to games as well...

Probably not since games would be classed as a computer program?

 

New section 28B provides that an individual may make personal copies of a copyright work (other than a computer program) which is lawfully owned by that individual, provided the copies are made for that individual’s private use, without infringing copyright in the work. Any personal copies must be destroyed if the individual transfers the work from which they were made to another person, unless the copyright owner authorises the transfer of the personal copies to that person. Any personal copy which is not so destroyed or is transferred to another person without the authorisation of the copyright owner shall be treated as an infringing copy for the purposes of the Act. Subsection (10) provides that any term of a contract which prevents or restricts the making of a personal copy in accordance with section 28B is unenforceable. (Source)

[X-13]

Probably not since games would be classed as a computer program?

 

I'm not so sure about that... I that means things like MS office and Photoshop.

 

Though, if it is classified as a program, what about the cutscenes and music?

 

Once again, we have a law that raises more questions than it answers...

[GREED]

So hold on. Before the likes of iTunes and what not, in which I mean the store and download music, every mp3 player and mobile phone capable of playing music was an illegal device... wow!

[elsiegee40]

I'm not so sure about that... I that means things like MS office and Photoshop.

 

Though, if it is classified as a program, what about the cutscenes and music?

 

Once again, we have a law that raises more questions than it answers...

 

I too think that games would be classified as computer programs. It is what they are after all... computer programs do all sorts of things and are not just tools.

[synaesthesia]

Of course not, @GREED - they were legal devices! We all only ever listened to stuff we made ourselves and other "free" music, though right?

[hawc]

Under the current laws, the coppers would have a brilliant time at my school.... they would arrest 99% of the students and staff. *Runs and hides when realizes that the music I am listening to has been ripped off of a cd*

[GREED]

Of course not, @GREED - they were legal devices! We all only ever listened to stuff we made ourselves and other "free" music, though right?

 

Tehehe!!!

[Arthur]

I hope this doesn't happen!

 

UK music industry pushes for a new tax on CD copying

 

If you buy a CD (or vinyl) and want to listen to it on your iPhone, music labels ideally want you to pay out again for the digital version, not rip it to your computer and transfer across. However, the government argued that because its private copying laws are narrower than most European countries, a levy shouldn't be applied in the UK.

 

Music watchdogs aren't having that, so they're lobbying for songwriters, musicians and other rights holders to get additional kickbacks, which could be deducted from sales of MP3 players, blank CDs and hard drives. The High Court now has to decide whether the music industry is being overly greedy or justified in charging for private copyrights.

 

Government facing judicial review challenge over failure to compensate in private copying exception

 

The Musicians’ Union (MU), The British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors (BASCA) and UK Music have launched an application for Judicial Review of the Government’s introduction of a private copying exception without providing fair compensation for songwriters, musicians and other rights holders within the creative sector. The MU, BASCA and UK Music welcome the purpose of the new measures, namely to enable consumers to make a copy of their legally acquired music.

 

However, this is a bad piece of legislation as it incorrectly implements the law by failing to include fair compensation for musicians, composers and rights holders. The private copying exception will damage the musician and composer community. It contravenes Article 5 (2) (b) of the Copyright Directive which includes a requirement that where a member state provides for such a copyright exception – as the UK now has – it must also provide fair compensation for rights holders. It is the compensatory element of a private copying exception that lies at the heart of EU law and underpins common respect for the songwriters, composers and musicians whose work is copied.

 

The decision of the UK Government not to provide fair compensation to songwriters, composers and musicians is in stark contrast to the vast majority of countries in Europe who have introduced private copying exceptions. The absence of a compensatory mechanism has led to the judicial review being applied for. The Judicial review process will involve the High Court examining the Government’s decision to ensure that it was made in a lawful way. It will test the manner in which the Government made its decision. Our intention is that a successful challenge will lead to the decision being re-made properly, with the legislation amended appropriately.

[sted]

Music watchdogs aren't having that, so they're lobbying for songwriters, musicians and other rights holders to get additional kickbacks, which could be deducted from sales of MP3 players, blank CDs and hard drives. The High Court now has to decide whether the music industry is being overly greedy or justified in charging for private copyrights.

 

what a croc

 

so if I buy a blank cd and use it to back up pupil documents say I have to give money to a music industry that im sorry isn't exactly short of a bob or 2?

 

Why not tax fridges because people can store beer in them so they don't need to go to the pub to buy it. Its almost worth pirating music so these awful companies might go to the wall

[localzuk]

The music industry are greedy. That is all that I take from this. How much of this extra tax would end up in the pockets of actual musicians anyway? Guessing a very small amount after "admin" costs by the various agencies and labels...