The gist of it is this: if I spend $15 and buy a CD, I should have the right to transfer that CD to other formats, such as ripping it to MP3 files on my computer, and then copying those MP3s to my iPod. What gives the record company the right to tell me on what devices I'm allowed to listen to my music that's been legally bought and paid for?
Likewise with DVDs; if I pay $20 for a movie, why can't I rip it to my laptop's harddrive, since watching a movie from the HDD instead of the DVD drive is much better for conserving battery life? That's very handy for watching a film on a plane, since most laptop batteries last less than two hours if the DVD drive is in constant use.
In neither of the above examples did I pirate the copyrighted content or distribute it to other people who haven't paid for it. How have I done anything wrong by using the media in manners that the copyright holders don't like?
It's no secret that the record and movie companies resist technology changes like no other. Back in the early 1980s, they were crying doom and gloom, saying that the Walkman and the VCR were going to kill their industries (ironically, both were products of Sony, which is now one of the biggest media companies and strongest proponents of this type of legislation). As we all know, though, portable music and home video both proved to be huge boons for the record companies and movie studies, opening new avenues of profit that didn't exist before.
|