Karaoke Forums

how leagl is computer karaoke? is there copyright problems with this
type of system

I posted this in another forum... but since it seems to come up I'll post it here and maybe we could just point to it in the future.

Let me start with - sorry for the long post, but hopefully it's informative.

First things first, I am NOT a lawyer, I'm not a lawyer in training, I don't work in the legal field, I don't even play a lawyer on TV. I have done IT work for over 15 years and over 5 years of that was in the security field within IT. Within the scope of my job it's my responsibility to know copyright law as it applies and to work with legal counsel for the companies I've worked for to insure we follow appropriate laws. Keep in mind this work has been in the private and public sector including work for fortune 500 companies, the Department of Transporation, the Department of Defense, and some heavily regulated entities dealing in the petro-chemical industry. My knowledge is based in my own readings of law, recent cases that affect copyright (like the BetaMax decision, the RIO case, etc), new laws (like the DMCA), similar research, talking with industry professionals in the know, and a little common sense. Ok, enough of the background, if you're a lawyer (or even if you're not) and think I have something wrong please let me know as I'm always willing to listen to an intelligent arguement on this subject.

This subject covers two areas that apply to copying and ripping of commercial copyrighted materials - licensing, and copyright law.

There have been a lot of changes in copyright law over the years and it's been an interesting field - especially here of late. A common misconception and more often misquoted in concept is the fair use portion of USC Title 17. Here it is quoted:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."

As you can see, it specifically allows for reproduction for purposes of "critisism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research" but it is not limited to only these uses. Everyone assumes it's under fair use because it allows for copies but not in the sense of what's normally used.

The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 is the first law that automatically assumes that copyright will be infringed and imposes a 'tax' of sorts on Digital Audio Tape (upto 3% of the cost of the tape) and DAT recorders (up to $8 per recorder) to support the violation of copyright on this media format. It also requires the use of Serial Copy Management System (SCMS) limiting the number generations of copies of copies that can be made using DAT. The portion of this law that applies to digital copies is:
"SUBCHAPTER D. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN INFRINGEMENT ACTIONS,
REMEDIES, AND ARBITRATION
Section 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."

This clearly allows you to use a digital recording device to create a copy for noncommercial use. The problem is we have a law that identifies a specific technology and mechanism and technology leap-frogged the law in some respects. Mainly, a computer is NOT clearly defined as a digital recording device under this law. Fortunately, it become a little more clear after the RIAA vs. Diamond Multimedia (RIO) case in this respect. This decision, and the former Betamax decision (Universal vs. Sony '84) allows for the time-shifting and format-shifting of copyrighted works.

Here's the problem for KJ's though. All decisions so far have identified the noncommercial aspects of the format-shifting under copyright law and the later interpretations of how the 'fair use' portion of the original statue and later decisions apply. That's the problem. While legal precedence allows a consumer to rip CD's it doesn't allow a commcercial entity to do the same thing. So basically, I can rip my own CDG's and any other media I have to my computer and there's not anything anyone can do about it. The minute I do a show though I'm now a commercial entity and the law is again ambiguous. So what's a KJ supposed to do in a case like this? Call the people that would press charges - the manufacturer of your discs.

I, like many KJ's, are considering making the shift to MP3+CDG and stop carrying around a couple hundred discs (espcially the SC8125 I just got for Christmas - woohoo!). So I called the manufacturer from which well over 50% of my discs come from and asked for their licensing department. I talked with a nice gentleman who told me that as long as I maintain a 1:1 ratio of discs to ripped music then I would not be prosecuted. If I was asked about my music and I could produce all my discs for EVERY song on the computer I wouldn't have a legal problem with his company. In our discussion I specifically asked about copies of our of print discs and was told the same thing - a 1:1 ratio is MANDATORY and the ability to produce the originals quickly is paramount. On the other hand, I was told by the first person I talked with (NOT in licensing) that they provided no assistance with CAVS machines and if I was trying to load the materials onto a CAVS machine they wouldn't even talk with me. Strange twist, but I suppose it's more to do with proprietary formats and a refusal to work with this manufacturer that cause this issue. IOW, a political problem and less a technological one.

Well, that's it in a nutshell. It's ambiguous as best, but the current trend would be that a 1:1 ratio of discs to digital libraries with only one or the other in use at any time seems acceptable by one of the strictest manufacturers (BTW, it was Sound Choice I called).

I'm glad he didn't ask for a detailed explanation!

In searching for an answer to this question, MTU (Hoster) asked http://www.ipjustice.org/, a legal organization based in San Francisco, CA, whose Principles are dedicated to clarifying and protecting the rights of consumers to use intellectual property.

http://www.ipjustice.org/karaokefairuse.shtml This should help clarify the legal rights of owners of Karaoke CD+G discs in the USA. The report affirmed the right to make backup copies of Karaoke CD+G discs and to format shift content (import/copy) onto a hard drive, where there is an original CDG disc behind every hard drive copy of the disc in use. The Conclusion paragraph is below.

The owners of Karaoke CDGs, facilities, mobile hosting services and consumers, have invested substantially in the purchase of large libraries of Karaoke CDGs. Allowing them to copy the contents of their CDGs for backup or format-shifting to hard drives would also be a fair use, and is entirely consistent both with the legislation on copying digital media passed to date, and with traditional fair use analysis ruled on by the US courts.

According to IP Justice´s legal research, CDG disc owners can feel comfortable making backup copies and other fair use copies of their discs. US Courts have also upheld the right to format-shift media by copying it to another device such as a computer hard drive or MP3 player for more convenient use.

as long as it's on a 1:1 ratio, morally and hopefully legally, there should be no problem.

IF you can prove ownership of the discs!!! so it's NOT ethical to convert and then sell your originals!