Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Media Government Music United States Politics Your Rights Online

Two US States Restrict Used CD Sales 500

DrBenway sends us to Ars Technica for a report that Florida and Utah have placed draconian restrictions on the sale of used music CDs; Wisconsin and Rhode Island may soon follow suit. In Florida, stores have to hold on to CDs for 30 days before they can sell them — for store credit only, not cash. Quoting: "No, you won't spend any time in jail, but you'll certainly feel like a criminal once the local record shop makes copies of all of your identifying information and even collects your fingerprints. Such is the state of affairs in Florida, which now has the dubious distinction of being so anal about the sale of used music CDs that record shops there are starting to get out of the business of dealing with used content because they don't want to pay a $10,000 bond for the 'right' to treat their customers like criminals."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Two US States Restrict Used CD Sales

Comments Filter:
  • by SadGeekHermit ( 1077125 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:19PM (#19030361)
    Makes me glad I live in New York, where there are used CD stores everywhere and the stoned counterperson barely notices you.

    Hey! Is this first post? I think it is! Umm... W00t?
    • by SpeedyDX ( 1014595 ) <speedyphoenix@ g m a i> on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:44PM (#19030703)
      I was gonna say that I lived in Toronto, where there are also used CD stores everywhere, then feel all cocky about it ... then I remembered the Canadian government is charging a levy on blank CDs. Sigh.
    • this does NOT suck (Score:5, Interesting)

      by caffeinemessiah ( 918089 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:54PM (#19030779) Journal
      This does NOT suck.

      In fact, this could be exactly what we need. This is clearly such a ludicrous measure that if it goes into law everywhere, the apathy-riddled consumer might actually sit up and notice. When average Jimbo down the street gets hit with fees and taxes and fingerprints and anal probes while trying to sell his old stash of CDs, there should at least be a little more awareness about what the RIAA f**kheads are trying to do. Hopefully, that will lead to consumer action and eventually enough agitation to overturn this measure and also place some iron clamps on what the RIAA can and cannot do.

      In other words, the more ludicrous the little battles are, the better chance we have of winning the war. Now the lawyers here can strike me down.

      • by Ucklak ( 755284 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:06PM (#19030891)
        Really. Who the hell signed the deal on this???
        Anti consumer, anti business. Pro RIAA.
        I guess Craigslist will get a surge for CD sellers/buyers in those states for the time being.
        Once they criminialze your average Joe from selling used CDs person-to-person like it's a controlled substance, the pitchforks and torches will come out.

        • by I am Jack's username ( 528712 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @04:57AM (#19033389)

          When the weapons of mass destruction thing turned out to be not true, I expected the American people to rise up. Ha! They didn't.

          Then, when the Abu Ghraib torture thing surfaced and it was revealed that our government participated in rendition, a practice where we kidnap people and turn them over to regimes who specialize in torture, I was sure then the American people would be heard from. We stood mute.

          Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called terrorists suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly, we would never stand for that. We did.

          And now, it's been discovered the executive branch has been conducting massive, illegal, domestic surveillance on its own citizens. You and me. And I at least consoled myself that finally, finally the American people will have had enough. Evidentially, we haven't.

          In fact, if the people of this country have spoken, the message is we're okay with it all. Torture, warrantless search and seizure, illegal wiretappings, prison without a fair trial - or any trial, war on false pretenses. We, as a citizenry, are apparently not offended.

          Boston Legal, "Stick It []" (season 2, episode 19), written by David E. Kelley & Janet Leahy.
      • by conteXXt ( 249905 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:36PM (#19031143)
        While I fully admire your optimism, I think that, sadly, it will change nothing. Jimbo invented apathy.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Red Flayer ( 890720 )

        This does NOT suck.
        In other words, the more ludicrous the little battles are, the better chance we have of winning the war.

        I wish it worked that way, but it doesn't. What happens is that we get accustomed to each new ludicrous action, and in the end, we've got ridiculous laws that few people have much of a problem with. Too few people are concerned about restrictions on selling used CDs, and the same will be true of the next draconian measure taken.

        Three hundred million people in the US, it's pretty h

    • by Divebus ( 860563 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @11:31PM (#19031635)
      There's definitely a market for used MP3s, and the price is right.
  • by cashman73 ( 855518 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:19PM (#19030365) Journal
    So much for buying used CDs from some dude at a garage sale. Is the MAFIAA going to go after garage sales, too? Where does the witch hunt end?
  • wow (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stoolpigeon ( 454276 ) * <bittercode@gmail> on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:23PM (#19030393) Homepage Journal
    I moved to Florida roughly 10 months ago. This is the first I have ever heard of this. I've been googling around trying to find a reference to this in any type of local news media and I can't. Nothing so far. Maybe I'm missing it, but it seems like something of this magnitude would garner some attention.
    • Re:wow (Score:5, Insightful)

      by flar2 ( 938689 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:26PM (#19030445)
      You would think this would get some attention, but the whole reason the music industry gets away with these ridiculous laws is because nobody is paying attention. Besides, why would we trust the media to tell us about something like this? They probably have the same owners as the record companies.
    • Re:wow (Score:5, Interesting)

      by daeg ( 828071 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:39PM (#19030635)
      As someone who worked in Florida local media (WTSP-TV in St. Pete), I can tell you that Florida media completely ignores stories of magnitude and focuses on the retarded, weird shit. Supposedly this didn't happen much before the 2000 election when Florida became such a laughing stock.

      Want to know how shit like this is passed? Read this []. I realize it is written horribly, but the video speaks for itself: the Florida legislature votes largely by proxy. Most legislators do not attend the full sessions, when they attend at all.

      What do you expect from a state that fields Rhonda Storms []? (For a kick, read the first result description.)
      • Re:wow (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Mycroft_514 ( 701676 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:23PM (#19031033) Journal
        And has always concentrated on stories where they get the facts wrong. Like watching 6 in Orlando while they announced the shuttle as having launched the previous Friday. Too bad it went up on Thursday.... And when they get it right, you want them arrested. Again 6 in Orlando, with the reporters standing outside a house with SWAT before SWAT is to go in, and ANNOUNCES the address.

        But, still better than 6 in Schnectady / Albany, whom I had to call to inform that "The reports of my death were greatly exagerated".

        I would love to see who started this bill. We have Nelson as a senator, who is the deepest in the pocket of the RIAA of ANY Senator. And to those who care, he is a Democrat.
        • Re:wow (Score:5, Funny)

          by dbIII ( 701233 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:20AM (#19031981)

          We have Nelson as a senator

          Ha Ha!

      • Florida media (Score:3, Interesting)

        by falconwolf ( 725481 )

        As someone who worked in Florida local media (WTSP-TV in St. Pete), I can tell you that Florida media completely ignores stories of magnitude and focuses on the retarded, weird shit.

        Have you heard about how Fox News WTVT (Ch 13) [] tried to squash news about the health risks Monsanto's BGH, bovine growth hormone, has? A husband and wife team of reporters spent months talking to ranchers, healthcare workers, and scientists about BGH. They were about to air the report when Monsanto called Fox and wanted to

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by CODiNE ( 27417 )
        WOW indeed. From the Rhonda Storms blog

        Looking back over the events of the last few days, I am so overwhelmed with joy that I can barely muster the energy to bask in the warm, slightly moist glow of God's own love

        Slightly moist glow?!!

    • Re:wow (Score:4, Interesting)

      by BlueGecko ( 109058 ) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (kcallop.nimajneb)> on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:30AM (#19032061) Homepage
      Forget the media; I've been trying to find the bill. Would someone be kind enough to provide the section of the Florida or Utah Code so that I can see the exact wording? Nothing relevant comes up at [], which seems as if it ought to have it, and the Utah Legislature's list of 2007 commerce bills [] does not seem to contain anything even dimly resembling the Ars Technica story. Could someone with access to LexisNexis or Westlaw please confirm whether these bills even exist, let alone passed?
  • hmph... hello FTC? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) * on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:24PM (#19030411)
    The article says "The Federal Trade Commission has scrutinized the music industry for putting unfair pressures on retailers who sell used CDs"... This seems to me to be similar unfair pressure, but this time it's coming from state governments. Is this sort of law even enforceable?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kadin2048 ( 468275 ) *
      Well, given the scope to which "Interstate Commerce" has been expanded, to include even transactions or activities which occur solely within the bounds of one state, you'd think that maybe the FTC could step in and stop this.

      (Not that I'm saying that the expansion of Interstate Commerce is a good thing, but if they can stop Californians from getting marijuana despite state laws making it legal, you'd think they could enforce FTC restrictions over the will of a bunch of asshat legislators in Florida.)
  • in 1995 when I still bought CD's. Let me know when they do this to used MP3's.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:25PM (#19030427)
    Why does it figure that one of the dumbest laws I've heard of in a long time would start there?

    Florida, well... I don't even need to describe the dumb things that go on down there.

    Utah? They're best known for things like the "Clean Port 80" act (all internet porn should go on one port!), crazy anti-tech laws, "Yarro's Law" apparently passed at SCO's behest, and SCO, where we have Brent Hatch behind some of the crazy laws, not to mention their senator Orin Hatch and his crazy ideas.

    Now, there are lots of nice folks in both states, of course, but any state that allows SCO folk to help write laws, well, I have to think they're positively Utarded.
  • by miskatonic alumnus ( 668722 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:25PM (#19030437)
    until the fascists outlaw that. I swear, I have long been a proponent of paying for my music. There are several out of print titles I've paid top dollar for on ebay and in the used section of the local record store. But if this shit becomes the norm, I'll start downloading everything for free, lawsuits be damned. Fuck these sons-of-bitches.
  • rubbish (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wall0159 ( 881759 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:25PM (#19030439)
    "The legislation is supposed to stop the sale of counterfeit and/or stolen music CDs"

    This is clearly irrelevant, since they should then apply this to the sale of _any_ second-hand goods - any of which _might_ be stolen or counterfeit.
    Even if they did that, what is the point of "in-store credit"? Will they then stipulate that said credit can _only_ be used for the purchase of _new_ media, rather than other second-hand media?

    Gosh, I'm glad I only live in a US colony (Australia) instead of mainland US! It seems the RIAA-pists won't be happy until there's an income tax component for "expected music/media consumption."
    • Re:rubbish (Score:5, Funny)

      by dex22 ( 239643 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [resucitsalp]> on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:30PM (#19030519) Homepage
      Shut up. You'll give them ideas.
    • Re:rubbish (Score:4, Interesting)

      by nolife ( 233813 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:56PM (#19030805) Homepage Journal
      I've had music CDs stolen in the past. It sucks. This was before CDRs were on the market and I don't believe a single insurance company covers recording media. I went to a local pawn shop to try to replace some of my stolen cds, One specific shop I frequent often did not place the cds in any specific order, basically, they threw them in a storage bin in any old order. One day, like 25 out of the 30 in this one specific bin contained almost my entire collection of cds I had taken from my car. I listen to a wide variety of music (death metal, classical, electronica etc) and a couple of the CDs were special order DDD discs from Telarc. Even a few of the covers that I was missing from the plastic cases were missing on these ones (a few more were missing then what I already had at home but not one "extra" cover was present. Coincidence? Who knows but I ended up buying quite a few of them back. I checked that same pawn shop often but my stolen car stereo never showed up there. I called the officer "working" on my case and he said unless there were identifying marks, there was nothing they could do.
      I do not blame a lack of law or holding period for my cds being stolen or resold. It happens. This law does not directly help the people that have merchandise stolen, it MAY attempt to make it not worthwhile for someone to target CDs but I agree that the main goal seems to be to please the RIAA. Maybe not directly related to theft but people that copy and then sell the originals.
  • by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:25PM (#19030441) Journal
    Garth Brooks was pushing royalties for used CD sales way back when I had a shop that sold used CDs. This is right before he quit doing shit, so I guess he was just wanting some extra royalties on his old stuff. I thought it was a money grab then, and it is now.

    Since I have always only bought used CDs, I guess now I will need to start downloading and burning all my music instead. No way I'm paying $20 for 2 good songs, and I don't want an ipod.
    • by hotsauce ( 514237 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:55PM (#19030789)
      Why does Slashdot only report only bad legislative news? Why don't they report all the good news? It's just like Iraq: the liberal media only focuses on the few (dozen) bombs that go off every day, while ignoring all the good news that is overflowing from there.

      Why doesn't Slashdot report all the good news? Like the PATRIOT Act, and the USA Act (I am no lawyer so I haven't read them, but the names really tell me all I need to know). I am sick of people acting as if politicians don't always look after my best interests.

      If you commies don't like our system, why don't you all go live in Afghanistan?!
  • Pawn shops (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:26PM (#19030443)
    So, except for the only store credit part, they're making them follow the same laws that pawn shops must follow here in Colorado? That is, valid ID and fingerprints are required as well as a 30-day holding period for all items. Working in a pawn shop, I can point out that CDs, DVDs, and video games (VHS is dead) and other common but low-value items are rarely even investigated by the police. Proving the ownership of such a generic type of item is futile. Un-serialized items in general are, really. Despite the annoyance, I still fully support the restrictions pawn shops are given and we -- the honest brokers -- fully try to insure that stolen items are returned to their rightful owners or are at-least unsellable.
  • ... just look for DRM.

    Then it can't be bootleged..... right??

  • Do you realise that when you buy a second hand album that the music industry thinks you're stealing that music?

    After all, you've acquired a copy of the songs, but the artist has recieved no compensation from you.

    *sighs* These people just do not understnad some conecpts integral to society (reuse, second hand sales, etc).
    • by kingsindian1 ( 782066 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:35PM (#19030589)
      Courtney Love has a nice article [] on her take on piracy etc.
      Her view on the issue is that the music industry is a huge, profiteering middleman and artists are swindled by them. She's of the opinion that for an artist, more exposure, however it comes, is a good thing and will lead to people buying more stuff.
      The music industry is whining just because they're being cut out from a direct experience between an artist and the listener.
    • by StudMuffin ( 167171 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:47PM (#19030723) Homepage
      I heard a rumor that there is actually a place where you can BORROW CD's without PAYING for them and it is usually supported by taxpayer dollars and local cities and states! I also hear that you can borrow 'books' and read them and return them without paying a single royalty to the author.

      WHEN will the agencies crack down on this atrocity! //sigh//
  • by mbourgon ( 186257 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:27PM (#19030473) Homepage
    is telling. I think this affects me - while I don't often buy used CDs (sorry - my desires are too damn eclectic to be satisfied locally), I want the option. Does it affect others here, or are we all buying them off ebay, buying the tracks off iTunes, or simply downloading them?

    Is this the RIAA trying to curb rights? Is this Garth's revenge? Or is it something less? And, anybody know where in Florida the police were investigating? Is there any way to have this looked at by the media? I think most people would care if the local news did a nice little piece about how their hard-earned tax dollars were being spent making sure Johnny couldn't buy a used CD, rather than #insert EVERYBODYPANIC.h

    Ars, thanks for bringing this up.
    (and hey, someone else comment - I can't believe that so few people care)
  • by rackhamh ( 217889 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:27PM (#19030483)
    And yet you can still buy a firearm at a gun show in Florida with no background check, and police must destroy records on gun sales within 48 hours and are prohibited from maintaining gun sale records that could be used for gun tracing and criminal investigations [].

    What THE HELL is wrong with this country???
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:31PM (#19030545)
      If only there were some way to turn the RIAA and the MPAA against ... the NRA.

      Guys, we have our game plan from here on out.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by wvmarle ( 1070040 )

      Yeah well, duh... which shop or gun manufacturer would like to be linked to a murder? I don't think any. After all guns don't kill people, people do, isn't it?

      But second hand CD sales... which must be related to illegal copying... what is more noble now then helping to catch those horrible music pirates!

      The above of course all ironic... this note is for humourless people.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:05PM (#19030879)
      What's wrong is that groups like Brady are perpetually distributing a variety of lies and half-truths to the public for their own political purposes. Can you purchase a firearm in a gun show without a background check? Yes, you can-but only from a private person. Any dealer still has to run a check. Those who have been to gun shows, and who are familiar with how criminals operate, will tell you that the majority are not going to be relying on gun shows for the weaponry.

      As for the second part of that statement, it only shows how much misinformation Brady puts out, and how little understanding there is by most people on how traces are conducted. When a dealer sells a firearm, they are required by law to keep the 4473 form on file for as long as the business remains open. When/if the business shuts down, the 4473s are sent to the ATF. If a gun is recovered from a crime, the serial numbers get sent to the ATF, who then will go through the chain of possession to the last FFL who possessed it (the dealer). That dealer will then give them the 4473, which has contact information on the purchaser (which is verified at time of sale using state-issued current identification). At that point the buyer can be tracked down, and contated to find out the disposition of the firearm. Local police do not need to keep their own sale records because such a system is already in place, and doing its job quite well. Brady would like to have records of every time any firearm is touched by a human being, with DNA records attached, and under realtime surveillance. Or just a total ban.

      Other posters are correct: turning to the Brady Campaign for information on firearms is a perfectly analagous to looking to the RIAA for info on piracy.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rossz ( 67331 )
      Uhm, BULLSHIT. A background check is required when you purchase a firearm, even at gun shows. This lie from the Brady Bunch is one of many they just kept repeating so often that gullible people (go look in a mirror) began to believe it.
  • ...Entire Florida population last seen flocking for Bittorrent, Limewire, and points north.
  • hmmm... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Travelsonic ( 870859 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:29PM (#19030505) Journal

    In Florida, stores have to hold on to CDs for 30 days before they can sell them ... the local record shop makes copies of all of your identifying information and even collects your fingerprints.

    I though these were CDs, not guns!

  • Ugh.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    Quote from the attorney who was trying to fight the legislation, during the final court session he said, "That's the stupidest fucking idea I've heard since I've been at Microsoft." The courtroom fell silent, even the judge was speechless.


    P.S. Yes it's overdone but... fuck, I have nothing else to say to this than Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?
  • Punish those evil doers who dare excersize their right to sell property under the US consitution.

    Next we can ban selling and buying used cars. The exercise costs the auto industry billions of un-verifible money from potential revenue every year. Poor starving automotive engineers and CEO's work very hard to design and build the latest cars that are copyrighted under US law thanks to selling used cars.

    Infact just about everything is copyrighted so we should just ban the sale of anything used. Think about how
  • A reminder (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Philotic ( 957984 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:31PM (#19030531)
    "...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by mnemotronic ( 586021 )
      Dude, I would, but they took away my gun, then they took away my vote. But they did give me this nice "re-elect Bush in 08" tee-shirt and suggest I wear it at least once a week.
    • by Thaelon ( 250687 )
      A giant WTF to whomever modded parent Funny. Please tell me you just misclicked. This shit isn't funny anymore.
  • Rip 'n Sell (Score:4, Insightful)

    by samkass ( 174571 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:31PM (#19030533) Homepage Journal
    I haven't actually put a commercial CD into a drive in a year or more, and all the ones I still own are long since ripped. I was thinking about selling all my CDs, but then my ripped copies would be illegal, and I'm one of those weirdoes who actually likes to pay fairly for what they have. So what do I do if I don't want the clutter? Throw them all into a landfill?

    It seems like the days of the used CD store are almost gone anyway. Despite the DRM politics, it's awfully convenient to buy online. And with CDs so easy to rip and resell, used CD stores are little more than rent-to-steal shops these days.
  • Ah wonderful (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:31PM (#19030539)
    Now this debate can happen all over again.

    For the record, I was buying back CDs at a used record store in Washington State in the early nineties. We required photo ID. We wrote the information on your photo ID in a Big Scary Book. After we bought your CDs, we held on to them for 30 days. Then, after 30 days, we typically sold them. And it was no big deal. Didn't hurt business, didn't scare customers. Didn't have a damn thing to do with filesharing (I don't believe the original Napster existed yet). We caught a decent number of CD thieves by matching sales of odd CDs to lists of stolen CDs. It worked to everyone's benefit except maybe the thieves.

    By the way, it's Really Freaking Obvious when someone's selling stolen goods. Seriously. We're checking the lists of stolen CDs before they even walk out the door. Thieves are idiots, and not subtle idiots either.

    These laws are similar. They include a fingerprint provision presumably to combat fake ID's. I think that bit is unneccessary and odious (because, in my experience, we were able to catch all of our fake-ID-using thieves because they kept coming back). It requires a business permit. Sigh, whatever. It requires trading for store credit rather than cash. That's stupid--people selling their old CDs hardly ever want store credit, even if the value of that store credit is more than the cash. Reason? People sell their old CDs with "I'll finally dump these old CDs" on their mind. Buying new CDs is typically not what they want to do. We offered trade or cash to people, and most chose cash.

    So it's basically a dumber version of a law that has existed for over a decade in my state. Big freakin' deal.
  • by Glowing Fish ( 155236 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:35PM (#19030593) Homepage
    The stated issue behind the restrictions on reselling CDs seems to be that they are a likely good to be stolen and resold. I suppose that this does make sense, and that CDs should have the same restrictions put on them that any other good sold in a pawnshop should.

    But there seems to be hints that this is just a way for the recording industry to stop the reselling of CDs.

    But there would have to be a closer studying of the legislation and the people backing it to find out which one is the real reason this is being pushed.

    On the face of it, though, I find it a little unlikely that this is an anti-theft measure. Especially the part about "only to be used for store credit". It seems unfair to target CDs like this, when there are plenty of other things: cars, guns, jewelry, musical instruments, home electronics, sporting equipment, that are also likely targets of theft (I would think all of those named would be better targets for theft than CDs), but (AFAIK), there isn't any specific laws that say you can't sell your skis or guitar for cash.
  • Follow the money? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:39PM (#19030637) Homepage
    Who sponsored the bills? Who were the biggest contributors? Is this a law enforcement driven thing or is "Big Media" attempting to stiffle the used media market to maximize their profits? What will this mean to
  • I wonder if... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ushering05401 ( 1086795 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:50PM (#19030743) Journal
    this move is in part related to drug use.

    I worked in retail management with a focus on loss prevention. The connection between hard-core drug addicts and reselling stolen multimedia was insane.

    90% of the chronic offenders we prosecuted cited drug money as their motivation and the resellers in New England, my market, were often little more than enablers. One employee of a major reseller in the area told me 'off the record' that a guy we had busted recently came in several times a day for several MONTHS with DVD box-sets still shrink wrapped and stickered from one of our stores. When I asked why they didn't call us he just shrugged.

    These new regulations are short-sighted and egregious, but it is possible the RIAA is not solely to blame. The war on drugs is still going on and from what I saw, shoplifting multimedia is a habit of choice for drug offenders.

    Some numbers:
    It was not unusual to see multimedia loss numbers from a single location at my former company top $100k for a single year. New box set titles @ the time I was doing this resold between 40-60 cents on the dollar within the first two weeks of release. So a single box-store multimedia outlet could have been subsidizing local criminals with an average of +/- $50k/year.

    I don't like the new laws, but the RIAA is most likely not solely to blame.
  • well fine then (Score:4, Interesting)

    by blhack ( 921171 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @09:57PM (#19030811)
    If the record companies really want to play this game, then I say let them. If, when i purchase a cd or DVD, I am only actually buying a license to view/listen to the content contained on it, not the actual disk itself (the media companies could argue that the media is free, and that they are retaining ownership of it, you are buying a license), then so be it. However, now that I own the license to use this particular arrangement of 1s and 0s, it is my right as a licensee to obtain it in any form that i see fit. I can fire up my favorite NNTP reader and download it. I can keep a copy of it on my ipod, on my work computer, on my friends computer, on my mt-daap server, in my car etc. Also, if at any point i decide that i don't want it any more, i can return the leased media storage device to the copyright holder, and have my license to use it revoked. For a full refund that is. It will become part of the cost of their business to provide us with the CDs/DVDs/Blue Ray Disks/Tapes/Mp3s/whateverthehellthemarketdemands.

  • Yes, ladies and gentlemen, there is a loophole! Unfortunately, the law applies to retailers only! People can go to a CD swap meet or a flea-market and freely buy and sell CDs directly with other people; a process known as "person to person" in the parlance of the common folk; all (and I can't state this emphatically enough) without the benefit of oversight by the Recording and Music Industry, and the benevolent guidance of our friends therein! Intolerable! CD shows are wild-west open-air bizarres where rogue CD and DVD owners snicker at the laws and exchange used entertainment media as if they owned it! This outrageous behavior must be brought under control!

    I did, ladies and gentlemen, mention the "person to person" aspect. May I remind my esteemed colleagues about the known threat to our families, our schools, our re-election financing, and our very way of life by the criminals, perverts, and terrorists that use these so-called "P2P" computer programs to exchange copyrighted material, 93% of which is pornography, over the computerized internet tube. Hooligans, drug-users one and all, and of the same ilk as these CD swappers!

    I say it's high time we closed this loophole, and bring peace, justice, and accountability to these havens of immorality. The lash of reason must be brought to bear, and the firm hand of democracy must crush this evil trend before it destroys all that we have labored so hard to impose.
  • by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:29PM (#19031081) Homepage Journal
    Don't really care either way. Everything's getting ripped and stuffed on a thumbdrive. So it's either draconian DRM that makes everyone a criminal or it's a new business model for the record companies. End of story. You can argue the merits of it either way. I don't care, the CD is nearly done and there's nothing the state of Florida or the RIAA can do about it.
  • by beadfulthings ( 975812 ) on Monday May 07, 2007 @10:33PM (#19031111) Journal
    I haven't bought a CD in four years, and I'm older than God. If I'm not buying them, I can't imagine who is. Actually the last one that came into the house was a DVD from my son, given as a birthday gift in November '05, and I wanted every single track that was on it plus the extras. It was a special exception. The only CD's I can envision buying now would be classical or rare, old jazz--but with the arrival on the scene of new turntables, the vinyl may yet emerge from the cellar.

    My first question, anyway, is this: What is the difference between secondhand CD's and secondhand books? Should we be looking forward to having our reading controlled in the same way they want to control our music selections? Is it time to spend a paycheck at Thriftbooks just in case?

    My second question is more technical: What does one need to know to intelligently purchase an "analog" tunes system these days? (I assume that would be turntable and some associated accoutrements. In the dark ages it would've involved pre-amps, amplifiers, speakers, etc.) If you have one, are there suggestions or references for ripping tracks off that treasured old vinyl to be played on something more portable like an ipod?

    Taking the long view, this is just a symptom of how desperate the music mafia has become. It's another nail in their coffin. I'm not surprised that Utah is one of the states. You can apparently gull their legislature into enacting just about anything by playing on their paranoia.

  • Real information (Score:3, Informative)

    by pontifier ( 601767 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:42PM (#19038523) Homepage
    I searched the Utah website, and didn't find anything. I called the Utah state legislature, and they didn't know what I was talking about. So I called John Mitchell, who was a source for the article.

    He kindly pointed me to Utah House Bill 402 [] which seems to cover any second hand store.

Marriage is the sole cause of divorce.