Re: [Hampshire] [OT] Vinyl Ripping

> I can imagine that if person A offered copying music in A's possession
> to others then that would be a commercial transaction and thus
> prohibited. However if person B wishes to transcribe music in person
> B's possession for B's personal use only, and uses A's service because
> of its superior technology...

...It's still prohibited.

CDPA88 does *not* give you any right to do this, even for yourself; it is
a breach of copyright, and that is an offence.

Now no copyright owner is actually going to prosecute someone for
format-shifting material they have bought for their own use - that would
be PR suicide. Similarly, setting up Aunt Doris' new MP3 player just isn't
going to trigger litigation - that would be daft, and everyone knows it.
But that doesn't make it a *permitted* activity under the Act, just one
that no-one can be bothered to prosecute.

As soon as you start introducing money into the equation, everything
changes. The law is much harsher, and the PR downsides are very much
reduced (probably no downside - "we're opnly going after evil commercial
pirates, not nice fluffy home users"). The probability of prosecution is
related to the probability of detection. And as this is a *criminal*
offence, a Police complaint could be made, and you could be arrested. Even
the possibility of such an outcome makes the whole project too risky for
my taste.

> IANAL obviously, but it sounds like an interesting case.

Like I said, I wouldn't even consider doing this without proper legal
advice. And, given that the law explicitly states that such copying is
unlawful, I can't see any vaguely sober lawyer saying anything other than
"don't do it".

Vic.