Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wolf,
??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?”? ?? ??????? ??????, ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? $100 ? ???, ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??????
My understanding of that text is as follows (anyone whose Yiddish is better than mine please correct me):
And if someone did, chas v’shalom, copy, which is theft, then it’s (retroactively – DY) a rental at the rate of $100 a day, on condition not to copy.
Aries,
When I called Aderet, they told me that most artists do allow one copy for your own use. Most lease agreements only prohibit anything which facilitates copying for others. Only some specific artists do not allow even a copy for oneself. i don’t think you have to assume it’s a problem unless it specifically states it (but of course ask your rov).
Most of this discussion, in which I opined that even copying for yourself would be proscribed by the rental agreement, is only relevant in those exceptional cases.
I wouldn’t blame Aderet, it’s up to the individual artist, Aderet is just going along with their wishes.
I will repeat that I am not at all involved in the music industry (except as a consumer), but I would hate for my comments to infringe on anyone’s enjoyment or cause a loss to Aderet.
marbehshalom,
To answer your question about the buyer not seeing it on the cover, I would say that it might depend on where you bought it and the arrangement with Aderet. If it was bought at Eichler’s (just using the example you used) and, in fact, Eichler’s actually rented it, it probably could not be subsequently sold. If it was bought at Mostly Music which is owned by Aderet, then it’s an interesting shaila, which I think would require the shikul hadaas of a dayan to determine if it’s reasonable to expect the buyer to either see it on the jacket, or know that it’s common for CDs to be rented.
If it’s determined that the buyer was not expected to know, then, back to Eichler’s, it would be the store’s fault for not explaining to the customer that it’s a rental. Then another determination might have to be made if the difference is significant enough to render the transaction a mekach taos, allowing the customer to return it for a refund if he so desires.
So the made the new commercial with the added first line.
What’s wrong with that sentence? 🙂
Then why the proliferation of secular law suits amongst the very frum; individuals as well as mosdos.
A big avla.
AZ,
I knew you were going there.
It might be ????? if it’s still available for free.
in general we would consider even one minute to fall under the rubric of chatzi shiur assur min hatorah
Yes, but there are exceptions, such as ???? ??’ ???? on ???. I don’t know that this isn’t the same, since there’s a specific reason for the ?????; it’s the time it takes to be ???? the ????? which ???? is a ??? for. (???? ??’ ???? on ??? is less than the ????? ????.)
Eman/mike: who are the “not good” boys marrying?
Often, no one, which is why it is relevant to the “shidduch crises”.
Your analysis is irrelevant to the question of why we have so many older single girls and so few older single boys.
That’s true. But if some of those “few” older single boys (and there are still plenty of them, just not in proportion to the girls) would get married, an equal number of girls would get married as well.
As far as a solution, that’s the point of the NASI project.
Tums,
When halacha and secular law conflict in dinei momonus, halacha is controlling.
Of course, but it doesn’t have to be a conflict. My thinking is as follows (and I really don’t know if there’s any validity to this at all):
If fair usage laws do not allow someone the right to sell a CD without the ability to use it “fairly”, such as copying for personal use, then maybe halacha will therefore invalidate that part of the “sale”.
Does this rental hocus pocus hold up in an American courtroom? If not, why not?
I don’t know, but I believe software is licensed, not purchased, so I don’t see why it can’t work for music (but I’m not a legal expert).
And does dina d’malchusa apply?
I wonder the same thing (I’m not a halacha expert). If so, then it should also be okay to use someone else’s tune (the royalties are pennies per copy sold which is usually insignificant in the Jewish music market; they would be chayav, but the amount would be small).
marbehshalom, (I like the screen name, BTW)
As evident in the ?”? (and others as well), the reason something would not be ???? ????? ????? is if there would seem to be a reason to assume that the transaction was being conducted despite the earlier limitation beind present, the specific reason being the receipt of money. That is irrelevant here.
Regarding your point about most people being unaware of the rental on the jacket, that’s debatable, but nevertheless irrelevant.
If someone made a verbal condition in a barely audible voice, but the buyer punkt heard it, would it be ???
I know that R’ Shlomo used to voice his displeasure all the time
That would be years ago.
I heard that this was a problem years ago, but not any more. I’m not on the inside, maybe you’re right. Is this an issue with regular, full length song types of albums, or just with kuzitz and chasunah type compilation albums?
I have a feeling that this thread is getting too close and too hot and may close down soon.
Why?
Anyway, there may be some technical halachic loopholes as Daas Yochid indicated, but how can one take the warning seriously when what is good for the goose is not good for the gander?
First of all, no hypocrisy has been proven; who says they don’t get permission from the composers? Secondly, I would hope that the issur of g’neiva should be enough to take it seriously.
That sugya is dealing with retracting the sale; this case is dealing with a different transaction structure than normal i.e. rental vs. sale.
the sugya discusses many different cases in all different scenarios i. i seeno reason why this case is any different
See ?”? ?????? ??. ???? ???”? ??”? ??? ??? ???? ?????.
This would be ???? ?????, not ???? ?????.
devorim sheblev is void and does not need any retraction. there is absolutely no chalos.
I’m not sure what you mean. What I’m trying to say is that it’s an ???? ????? ????? which makes it not considered ????? ????. See earlier in that same ?”?.
Regardless of ?’ ???? ???’s ????? that it’s not a ?????, that’s only ???? when we consider it ????? ????.
Would it also be g’neiva to take someone’s tune without permission and use it as your own, and then put out a violation order if it’s copied?
Interesting (and relevant) question.
You’re now discussing g’neiva of “intellectual property”. As I mentioned earlier, there is discussion in the poskim about such a concept, although the mekor is unclear.
Assuming that there is g’neiva of “intellectual property”, the fact that a CD producer “stole” someone’s tune, and then produced a CD with an order not to copy it, might make him a hypocrite, but I don’t think it would make it mutar to copy it. The producer, by having it sung, and the music arranged and performed, made a significant change to the original tune, and has added “intellectual value” to the property (and possibly avoided hasogas g’vul in the process).
By secular law, I’m told, one can use a previously recorded tune in a new production (it’s referred to as a “cover”) but must pay royalties.
also a rental means that after a certain time period,it must be returned. can aderet demand return?>
Yes, in theory. The longer version of the agreement (although I’m not sure if they are all the same) says that they can demand a return of the original CD after a 20 year extension (total of 40 years) but only if they personally demand it. So it definitely won’t happen.
Regarding your other post, I will bl”n look up the Birchas Shmuel. I didn’t notice your post because it was put in before my response to Tums so my name showed up as “last response”.
You still haven’t responded to my point that it’s not b’lev because it’s on the CD jacket at the time of the transaction, nor to my proof from the S”ma.
In any event i think we are not disagreeing… and the solution revolves aroudn closing the age gap in the early dating years.
I agree, and of course even 1% would be too large a difference, and even one Jewish girl unable to marry is a tragedy; I just (incorrectly) thought that you were downplaying how much the ratio drastically increases as a particular age group grows older.
AZ:
They don’t start out with a “vast” difference, only about 10-12% (about 3% increase in population each successive, younger “grade” is the number I’ve heard).
Since most boys get married, and rather quickly, as you say, the ratio of girls to boys increases as more people from that age group get married.
For example, if there were 100 boys starting in shidduchim and 90 girls, and within two years, 90 boys got married, that would leave 10 single boys and 20 single girls, a much higher ratio than it started with. The numbers are actually much bigger than that, and that’s just from one year’s sample.
The result is that despite the fact that most boys get married quickly, there are, unfortunately, plenty of older single boys, and by this time, a vastly larger number of girls.
Among these older singles, many have difficulty getting married, some because of the fact that they are burnt out, and some for inherent reasons, which is why they became older singles in the first place. Whatever the reason, any boy who doesn’t get married exacerbates the problem, as Oomis said.
The Baruch Levine CD, Touched by a Niggun , is similar to some of the Abie Rotenberg (Journeys) material (and that’s a big compliment).
Other ideas for a heartzige story song; Shwekey’s Sh’ma, Moshe Yess’s Yosef My Son, and a similar one, Avraham Fried’s The Return.
Chayav’s parents still don’t know. 🙂
Tums,
Did I imply that I thought otherwise?
As far as I know, he’s not even a poisek.
Are you referring to Rav Pesach Eliyahu Falk?
Or is it possible that the members of one’s household are a bit closer to you than the neighbors and can/should see some things that neighbors don’t?
I agree, but one must be very careful where to draw the line. Seeing affection is not the same as seeing pajamas.
Oomis,
If I understand you correctly, you’re saying that the numbers issue (more girls than boys) is a big enough problem, and boys being finicky and not getting married exacerbates the problem. I agree totally.
dy-
thats not true a 23 yr old doesnt have to marry a 35 yr old ur really wrong
I think you misunderstood my point. I am not recommending such a shidduch, I’m saying that despite the fact that there might technically be the same number of males and females, there are more females who are of age to get married, so there is a very real shidduch “crisis” (although panicking is not helpful).
Do we not have enough things to say are untzniusdig, that we have to pick on such naarishkeit as this?
So does that mean that once the quota of untzniudig things is filled, there are no more objections allowed?
As with all things of this nature, if you don’t like it, DON’T DO IT.
Some people like to object, in the CR, to things they find untzniusdig or otherwise objectionable. “As with all things of this nature, if you don’t like it, DON’T DO IT. “
“Our kids get to see us fight and disagree. Why shouldn’t they see that we can love each other too?”
That can be done without “showing affection” (I guess it depends on how one defines “showing affection”).
if it were not for txting, i would have NO social life.
That’s a great reason not to text.
canine,
He was responding to Charlie’s post.
I thought that when eclipse left,
and all of us were so bereft,
it would be the end,
of limericks penned,
and no more identity theft.
Her spirit, it seems though, did awaken,
the coffee room was not forsaken.
There now is a sequel,
eclipse with Equal,
unless for a ride we were taken.
Why not leave it for the Human Spell Checker
Because she uses a different name and style now.
In that case, he may feel that it’s wrong *for him*.
Would you agree that in that case it wouldn’t be “hiding in shame”?
So technically speaking, there is no shidduch crises.
If the 23 year old guys would marry the 35 year old girls, you’d be right.
That seems to state it is forbidden to put it on your 10 year old son’s MP3 player, since the son isn’t the “renter” and thus he is “others”. IOW, only the original renter can use it on his iPod. Very restrictive indeed.
Since he is “someich al shulchan aviv”, it’s actually the father’s mp3 player.
Furthermore, I’m not sure they are correct about “civil law”‘s view of this “rental”.
Nor am I. But to the best of my knowledge, civil law prohibits copying even for personal use, so it is consistent with fair use, and I don’t know if civil law cares about the lomdus behind a transaction, since the effect is the same as a sale.
popcorn~ Daas Yochid was makin’ a funny! ‘double, double, toil & trouble’ is what witches would say as they stirred their brew.. in fairy tales. 🙂
Besides, spell check doesn’t correct a correctly spelled word used in wrong context.
getzel1
Member
Spell Checkers – a little Poem.
A Little Poem Regarding Computer Spell Checkers…
Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/good-jokes#post-109081
But is that because he’s hiding in shame (because “eating out” is wrong), or is it because he just wants a nice, quiet night out without being disturbed?
I think there’s a third option as well; see my earlier post, reason #3.
Not sure why this is even an issue…
1) Kashrus standards in a restaurant are not the same as in his home (the same would apply to eating at a simcha).
2) To some, eating in a restaurant (other than if one is not home and simply needs food) seems like an overindulgence.
3) To some, it seems slightly unrefined to eat in public, and a rabbi or rosh hayeshiva for practical reasons (for his students to properly accept his words, there should be a certain “awe”) has to maintain his utmost dignity.
Could you see a difference between eating in an upscale establishment and a local pizza shop or burger place?
I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, just hypothesizing.
Why? –> Kasha
IMO, Why? –> shaila (usually).
Answer to a shaila = teshuva.
That’s what I wanted to say, you beat me to it. Shu”t!
OK, the conversation here was mostly about those CDs with a rentel agreement, but the majarity of CDs dont have that rentel agreement it just says do not copy, what about those CDs? can I copy those for myself? If according to halacha I can is it still unmentchlich to do so?
In my opinion, no problem of mentchlichkeit. Whether it would still be a problem of g’neiva would depend on whether or not there is a t’nai, what the intent of the t’nai is, and whether the t’nai itself works (machlokes haposkim). Obviously, if it were to be technical g’neiva, it wouldn’t be mentchlichkeit either! One could then argue whether it’s mentchlichkeit on the part of the producer. To be dan them l’caf z’chus, I would point out that they have lost many sales to illegal copying and are therefore quite frustrated, and that some people have availed themselves of the loophole pointed out by Niazik to obtain huge hard drives full of hundreds of albums of music without paying for them.
Niazik and Professional,
I agree with both of your posts, except that (Niazik) some poskim do seem to assume that it is actual g’neiva, although I don’t understand why.
DY are you saying in talmudic times, if someone would sell an ox and on the horn of the ox it would say that this ox is not sold but merely rented . do you think his unspoken term will be acknowledged?
If it was noticed by the “buyer”, yes.
p.s. CAN aderet demand i return the tape ?
No, similar to the way a leasing company cannot demand the car back before the term is up.
also a socher is mechuyav i on ones . am i liable for any damages to pay cash?
You would be, except that they specifically exempt you. (See below.)
p.p.s dy are you bakant with the sugya of “devorim shebilev”?
There are several reasons that “einom d’vorim” doesn’t apply here.
1) It’s not b’lev, as I explained earlier, and I don’t think you responded.
2) That sugya is dealing with retracting the sale; this case is dealing with a different transaction structure than normal i.e. rental vs. sale.
3)In that case, the possibility of applying a change has its upside and downside i.e. regaining property vs. loss of money. In this case, keeping the status quo (as originaly printed on the jacket) is completely to the benefit of Aderet.
4) The reason we assume that “einom d’vorim” is because the seller may have changed his mind for the sake of the money. The The R’ma (207 4) brings a “yesh omrim” (I don’t know who, if anyone, argues) that the rule of “d’vorim sheb’lev einom d’vorim” doesn’t apply to a matana (because there is no money involved – S”ma). In our case, the money remains the same; as was noted several times in this thread, they don’t charge any less for this long term rental than if it were a sale.
You could have argued that even an express stipulation has no bearing by “m’talt’lin” (R”ma 207 3), in which case argument 1) would not be valid, but 2), 3), and 4) would.
I think the question is not whats writen on the cover but whats written on the sales receipt, thats where a rentel agreement should be and there it says “sales receipt”.
Why? I would think that the prevailing agreement would be 1) what is stipulated before, not after the transaction, and 2) What is to the benefit of the one defining the transaction (in this case, Aderet, who prefers a rental.
FYI:
This is the English “nusach” used on many CDs:
Literally, kasha means difficulty. Hence, Shticky Guy, Wolf, and Pashutateh Yid are correct. I would explain it by saying that it refers to an inconsistency; the statement might be “difficult” because it contradicts a different statement made by the same person, or made by someone of greater authority, or logically inconsistent. A shaila is a query,often for psak halacha, but not necessarily.
ones made from buckwheat otay!!!!
Goq, you little rascal!
True, but fake frum is worse.
Wait, I just re-read Mr. 80’s post; that guy has a lower than average IQ, clearly not The Wolf.
I’ve managed for quite a number of years with no brain.
You aren’t by any chance a 44 year old French civil servant, are you?
One of my biggest turn offs – Bad table manners
Then you should work on it 🙂