LOL Elizabeth... What if you like both Barry AND Linkin Park? Personally I'd recommend a sentence of Ethel Merman's greatest hits on scratchy 78s played from 11pm to 4am each night.
Actually, I was kinda surprised the WP got it so wrong... As far as I can tell, the RIAA is not suing Howell for anything other than to make another example of someone and to cement the idea that "distribution" using file-sharing networks is as unauthorised as downloading from those networks (precedent here set in BMG Music vs Gonzalez). While not actually profit-seeking, making available to others so that they could illegally download should they so seek could be seen as some sort of "intent to deprive owners of economic value."
It will be difficult to make "copies intended for personal use made in a different format for use at a different time" a breach of "Fair Use" because there is already substantial legal precedent to uphold legality of doing so. The recent effort by the RIAA to make the MP3 format itself a legally-defined 'bad thing' will not work, and in my opinion would probably backfire.
Actually, I was kinda surprised the WP got it so wrong... As far as I can tell, the RIAA is not suing Howell for anything other than to make another example of someone and to cement the idea that "distribution" using file-sharing networks is as unauthorised as downloading from those networks (precedent here set in BMG Music vs Gonzalez). While not actually profit-seeking, making available to others so that they could illegally download should they so seek could be seen as some sort of "intent to deprive owners of economic value."
It will be difficult to make "copies intended for personal use made in a different format for use at a different time" a breach of "Fair Use" because there is already substantial legal precedent to uphold legality of doing so. The recent effort by the RIAA to make the MP3 format itself a legally-defined 'bad thing' will not work, and in my opinion would probably backfire.