Lawyer Alleges that First Daughters Violate Music Copyrights - Suggest RIAA Suit
An observant Florida attorney noticed in recent news that President Bush's twin daughters had made him a music "mix CD" to listen to while he was exercising. They gave it to him as a Father's Day present.
It was a cheap gift at the time, but some people thought that they should pay quite a bit more. Attorney Mitchell Silverman, one of those people, has reportedly sent a letter to the legal offices of RIAA asking them to sue George Bush's daughters for "stealing music".
Silverman's letter stated that the music CD was a serious violation of copyright laws. He added that the right-holders of the copyrighted works may be entitled to statutory damages in the amount of $150,000.00 per song. The letter stressed Silverman's hope that RIAA would pursue the matter as aggressively as they have in other cases in which copyrights have been violated. Many speculate as to whether Silverman's letter was a serious cry for action or a sarcastic stab at RIAA's previous lawsuits in which they have sued children and the elderly for downloading music from illegal sources.
After the letter was made public, Silverman came under heavy fire both for his assumption that the music on the CD was copyrighted material and possible misinterpretation of the law. In fact "mix CDs" are legal in certain circumstances. iTunes Plus now licenses music without digital rights management (DRM) for $1.29 per song. These songs have no burn limits, but does that make distribution legal as well?
Silverman's allegation that the music was pirated and warranted action by RIAA had no clear basis in law, since the copyright status of the music is unknown.
Silverman has now publicly retracted his statements, saying, "It has come to my attention that noncommercial copying of digital music recordings may not be an infringement under Title 17 of the U.S. Code, 'Copyrights.' I apologize for any confusion I may have caused or any mistaken impression I may have given."
So now the debate has shifted to whether or not the twins had the legal right to distribute the music, if in fact it was copyrighted material that they had legally obtained.
Many people argue that making a copy of copyrighted work and distributing it, whether it is one copy or a million, is not covered under fair use policy or the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA). Others disagree, pointing out that copying is legal under the act in certain circumstances, provided that the allowed equipment and media are used.
So much is not known about the Bush twins' "mix CD", what music it contained and how they made it that it is impossible to tell whether or not they violated copyright laws by making the CD and giving it to their dad. Silverman realized this after his letter to RIAA and that's why he retracted his statements and said that the "noncommercial copying of digital music recordings may not be an infringement".
As in most legal cases, the specific facts of the particular situation at hand are critical to determining whether or not a law has been violated, the elements of a crime have been satisfied, or a person has legal liability for an action. A local attorney is your best source of information about how the law applies to your particular situation.
