The exchange rate is a little less than a buck per disc — For example, send them 250 discs and you get an 8gb iPod Touch ($200) — which seems generous for CDs and a little less than market value for DVDs, based on what you can get for the discs at used bookstores.
I can't vouch for the company's legitimacy, but as long as it's on the up-and-up it provides a nifty de-cluttering service for lazy packrats (speaking for myself here). I emailed some questions to Kris, the company's PR guy, and here are his responses:
What do you do with the DVDs and CDs you accept?
In most cases we accept 100% of the items sent to us. We don't make a big fuss in case 5 CDs out of a collection with 200 or 300 items seem a little more scratched to us than to the customer. There are very few cases where we have problems. Usually the problems are clustered among these a very small number of customers. There will be more than one thing wrong with these problematic collections: scratched … promos … bootlegs … non-working items. Half of the people affected didn't bother to read the guidelines for eligible items posted on our website. The other half simply wants to take advantage of us, for example by sending us liquidation ware. It happens very rarely that we have to send whole collections back. We pay for the shipping, and insurance in case we don't accept a collection. Again, this is very rare and happens 2-3 times a year.
Now to the recycling aspect of your question: nothing is thrown away. Over the years, we have developed relationships to other companies that buy everything from us, even loose CDs without cover art and jewel case. We get these CDs because some customers misplace a CD into an incorrect cover, i.e. we end up with a loose CDs without cover art or original case. We export in bulk, different genres to different countries, e.g. classical music is in great demand in Korea and Taiwan. There is even a market for radio edits (CDs that are being sent to radio stations which contain several versions of the same hit track, e.g. just the vocals, just instrumental, call out, etc.). Most of our business is international.
-Do you accept Bluray?
Yes, and they count double. We haven't gotten a lot of Bluray's so far.
-Do multi-disc DVDs (season series, etc.) count as just one DVD?
No, all sets count by the number of physical CDs in the set, e.g. the famous Led Zeppelin boxset counts as four because it has four CDs inside.
-Do you accept DVDs in nothing less than boxes of 150? Why?
No, CDs and DVDs can be combined. You can send in 140 CDs and 10 DVDs for a total of 150 items. We require at least 150 items in one box because shipping costs have not only a weight component but also a per-package price.
-What happens if you don't accept certain discs due to scratches or incomplete packaging?
We recycle them but we can not return them to the customer. In most cases (see above) the customer won't even know that we can only use 145 of the 150 items sent to us.
-Can customers send in partial orders (for instance, 150 DVDs as a down payment of 300 for an iPod Touch), then send more in later to pay it off, then get the iPod? Or do they need to send everything at one time?
We haven't done this because it causes too much confusion. Picture our warehouse: every day we get dozens of different shaped boxes. It's difficult enough to match the different boxes and to keep track of each customer.
-What happens if someone sends in a box that has less than 150 DVDs or CDs?
Every customer has the option of substituting cash for up to 50 missing items at a rate of $1/item. Example: if you have 117 items but want an iPod that requires 150 items, you would simply include a check for $33 made out to ‘iPodMeister" together with your shipment. We couldn't help you if you only had 95 items because you would then have to substitute more items than allowed (maximum = 50). Bottom line about paying cash instead of sending CDs: we are not in the business of selling iPods. We just want to give people a chance to participate in the trade who are a couple of items short.Our CDs-for-iPod barter is so attractive for most folks because they are recycling old CDs and DVDs they don't longer use and are getting a brand new iPod without paying for it in cash.
iPods and iPhones are the hot gadgets of the moment and great Xmas gifts. iPodMeister offers an opportunity to give a great gift without having to come up with purchase price in cash.
Has anyone used iPodmeister before? Let me know if there are any Cash4Gold-like horror stories before I send them a box with all the DVDs and CDs I bought that seemed like a great idea at the time.
Ipodmeister
(Photo: iwantamonkey)
I got my email with the packing slips yesterday and I'm sending out the boxes today. Hopefully I'll be updating this with a happy ending in a couple of weeks.
]]>The bottom line is that Apple is safe, even if its customers violate copyright with their device.
]]>First, the Sony Betamax case applies to VCRs and time shifting. No case has ever applied it to CD ripping. CD ripping, I would argue, is not the same as time shifting anyway (the RIO changes it to "space shift"). Moreover, several cases make it clear that the Sony Betamax case has not been extended to include things like P2P sharing. My point is that Sony Betamax by itself does not bless CD ripping.
Second, RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, as well, does not address format shifting such as ripping a CD to a computer. I understand that realistically, the usual way that a song gets to a player is via ripping a CD, but the Diamond court conspicuously does not address this aspect of use. It used the Sony case to address say that it's OK to space-shift those files that already reside on a user's hard drive, but it never addresses the legality of how those files might have gotten there (ie ripping). My point is that the Diamond Multimedia case does not AT ALL determine that ripping a CD to a computer is legal. It's really not even what that case is about. There is language there that might help with a subsequent case about ripping, but it's not developed right now.
To be sure, the Audio Home Recording Act attempted to legislate Fair Use into CD ripping, but the Act famously excluded safe harbor for home computers and hard drives. This is, however, how most people rip CDs now. My point is that there is no legislation and no case on point that specifically allows for CD ripping in any capacity. The big "except" is a Fair Use defense, if you can articulate one. In all likelihood, ripping for personal use is OK per Fair Use, but there aren't really any cases directly on point with this. That's the reason why there's no specific case law that you could cite off the top of your head to justify your statement.
]]>My point is that the scenario you present has never been demonstrated definitively in court. I'm not talking about risk of prosecution (I never said that, so I'm not sure where you're getting it). I'm not saying that you are probably right (actually, I'm almost positive that you would be right if actually taken to court). But my point, again, is that RIAA doesn't want to risk being wrong. As long as they pick and chose their battles, they won't get a Sony Betamax-type case on point for CDs that is not favorable for them.
>>>I avoid loaded words like stealing, pirate, illegal (it is a civil matter), etc. And I despise the RIAA.
Um, OK. I don't have any issue with any of that. I wonder why you would point that stuff out.
>>>BTW, current copyright law is unconstitutional
Yeah, I understand your argument thoroughly. The SCOTUS doesn't agree with you and they, after all, are the ones who actually said that it IS constitutional. You don't agree with it. I don't agree with it, either. I wonder why you put this in your argument. It's completely beside the point.
]]>I am interested in this service (I have a closetful of used CDs, and just want to get rid of them). If this service is in fact on the up and up, I am very interested.
Please post if this is something you have successfully used, and if your experience was good.
]]>I love that argument lol. Yes you did acquire the music by legal means & then you sold it along with your rights to it. You no longer have the right to listen to that copy. If you want to continue to listen to it, don't sell the CD. When you sell a car, you give the car to the person who bought it. You SOLD you're rights to listen to that copy of the music.
]]>Yes it is. CD's are not a loss leader to the labels, artists or staff. Especially for the labels, it is their life blood. What about the songwriters, who often times, get NO money upfront and rely SOLELY on royalties. Guess what? Every song you steal is LITERALLY money coming out of their pocket, food coming off of their table, a roof going off from over their heads.
]]>@xtc46 - thinksmarter on twitter:
...you're so cute with your innocence intact like that.
]]>@Jimmy-James: Hi guys, My name is Dimetri and I have worked at iPodMeister during my time in the U.S. . I want to congratulate everybody to the earnest, debate about the legal aspects of the iPodMeister exchange of used CDs for a new iPod. Instead of taking one side I just want to provide some inside perspective from somebody who actually worked on the iPodMeister team.The digitizing is just a small part of iPodMeister. For a long time iPodMeister didn't offer digitizing. Most customers don't opt for digitizing. When I was working there most of the customers brought between 200 and 300 CDs and didn't want any file conversion. The only people that wanted their CDs digitized were usually classic- or jazz aficionados, often because they had out-of-print titles.
A little bit of background: iPodMeister is not a huge corporate entity but a small and always changing group of foreign college- and graduate students. The idea is to take old CDs that are collecting dust in the basements and attics and to make them accessible in other parts of the world where people are still listening to CDs because they don't have the money for an iPod (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Eastern Europe, to name a few).
The company never did any advertising when I was there. We got our customers through word of mouth and through occasional posts on the "Burning Man" mailing list or the blackboard of Food Co-ops. The guy from "Newsweek" heard about iPodMeister from his sister who had hooked up with us in New York before moving away. She wanted to clean house and get rid off her CDs. It was about house cleaning instead of copyright infringement.
When I was at iPodMeister, we worked out of a garage without windows or heat in the industrial section of Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The garage was divided into three stages for three different rock bands and we also did some iPodMeister work part-time.
I don't want to take away from your principled, spirited legal discourse. One could easily argue that it doesn't matter who breaks the law if the law is actually broken - a large cooperation or a small group of students from poor countries. But I just want you to refocus: digitizing is a side-aspect of the iPodMeister exchange of used CDs for new iPods. The real story is a recycling story and the transport of used CDs that bring pennies in the United States to countries where people still listen to CDs.
When I was at iPodMeister we occasionally got people who wanted to "trade" or "swap" digital files. We always declined. We also delete all files that were digitized immediately after sending them to the customer. If somebody wants to get his hands on a digital version of a current Top-40 hit there are much easier ways to do that then to buy the album, then send it to iPodMeister as part of a collection, and waiting to get it back on DVD. Almost all of the CDs I digitized were five to fifteen years old, in dusty and cracked cases, and often from labels that had gone out of business or CDs that were out-of-print.
Again, my compliments to everybody for their well thought-through input and passionate participation in this discussion!
Dimetri
]]>@XTC46- thinksmarter on twitter:
if you think albums are selling 5 million copies these days you're sadly mistaken. The top selling album of 1999 was "Millenium" by Backstreet Boys which sold over 9.5 million copies in the US in 1999. The top selling album of 2009 (so far) is "Fearless" by Taylor Swift with 1.3 million copies in the US.
The #10 top selling album of 1999 was "Wide Open Space" by Dixie Chicks with over 5 million copies sold in the US. The #10 top selling album of 2009 is "Big Whiskey and the GrooGrux King" by Dave Matthews Band with about 540,000 copies sold in the US.
& for math sake, we'll take that $1 per album you're talking about & we'll break it down.
Let's use Taylor Swift.
1 million copies sold X $1 royalty = $1 million
40% tax = $400,000. Now left with $600,000
Subtract the $100K advance from label. Left with $500K
Subtract 20% managers cut (from the $1mil). Left with $300K.
From those 1 million copies she's sold, she's left with $300K. & God Forbid you're a band. You have to (typically) split that between all the band members.
Of course, that's got to get you through your next album which would typically be 2 years away.
Just a little dose of reality for ya...
]]>We're better off that way, just donate to charity to get rid of something we don't want and that is nice enough to not just be recycled still. And I just <3 Libraries :D
]]>It's a bit long, but meh:
]]>Actually copying a CD for personal use IS clear. It has been established by precedent in Sony Vs. Universal City Studios (the betamax case)
[en.wikipedia.org]
Selling CDs and keeping a copy is also clear. How can it not be a violation of copyright? You are selling it, and keeping a copy. It is the same as making a copy and selling the copy. You are correct that the risk of prosecution is very low to nonexistent, but that doesn't mean it isn't a copyright violation. You won't get busted for making a copy of a CD and giving it to a friend, but that doesn't mean it isn't a violation of the copyright.
I avoid loaded words like stealing, pirate, illegal (it is a civil matter), etc. And I despise the RIAA. But lets not fool ourselves about what is going on with outfits like this.
BTW, current copyright law is unconstitutional (it clearly states in the constitution that copyright is for a "limited time", and it keeps getting extended indefinitely), and keeping our culture locked up for commercial entities.
]]>@gqcarrick: a dollar per CD on an album that sells 5 million copies makes them 5 million dollars...which isnt exaclty change.
So yes, low volume sales arent big money makers, but to say artists dont benefit from CD sales is stupid.
]]>@YouDidWhatNow?: They dont do it becasue they cant prove you have the digital copies. If you arent uploading or downloading the music, you are not doing damage to them, and they have little motivation to come after you. Then to come after you, they would need a warrant that allows them access to your computer, which they couldnt get with a simple "but so and so said they saw them". THEN once they did get access to the computer, it would be on THEM to prove you stole the music, you dont have to prove you are innocent, they have to prove you are guilty.
]]>@ben: I paid for the cd, and took the songs I wanted. The record labels got their money out of me. Whether I own the cd or not shouldn't matter, I aquired the music by legal means.
]]>Selling CDs is OK per first sale doctrine.
Copying a CD for personal use? Not clear. Probably OK in most situations.
Selling CDs and keeping a copy? Not clear. Probably not OK b/c of the affect on commerce.
However, those who facilitate copyright infringements don't always get into trouble. This is very fact-specific and it's difficult to say how this would play out against the company.
With the tension between all of the facts and laws, I'm not exactly prepared to say one way or another. RIAA, as of right now, doesn't weigh in either (per my previous comment).
]]>Selling your CDs to someone, and keeping a copy of the music is not at all covered under fair use.
Selling your CDs to someone and having them send you a copy of them is even less fair use, and clearly a copyright violation.
]]>They're total Nazis about condition, they won't take anything remotely indie and the awkward guy at the desk who probably listens to metal will make fun of your music collection, but for me it was a cheap and easy way to get rid of stuff. I'd say I got between $3-10 per disc for discs that had come out in the last 5 years, were by well-known artists, and were in rarely played condition.
]]>The RIAA spokesman is also correct about the DRM servers. Those types of servers are governed by the licensing agreements between the providers and the users. Copyright, in and of itself, doesn't really factor in to how those agreements are executed. The word "purchase" is defined by the agreements, not the RIAA.
]]>I've never had this many cds/dvds from personal use, but I used to work for a community radio station that always had boxes and boxes of crappy promo and radio only cds. Already suggested that they participate in this to get ipods for station giveaways.
]]>I'd bet that the RIAA would make that arguement.
I think that's a tricky one. If you could provide proof that you purchased a given CD, say "Hanson's Greatest Hits," and then provide a police report outlining how it was stolen, you might be able to emerge relatively unscathed from court with the RIAA comes-a-suing.
]]>I think if anyone from the RIAA took the time to look this over, they would have a field day with it. The otherside of that coin is, they made their money from the original sale and don't care anymore. Or the court case would force the issue and it might not work out in their favor.
But it does seem very odd that this service seems to be chugging along just under the radar, even with people trying to draw attention to it.
]]>Agreed. What if there was a fire, and the only thing that you had was your digital backup? Isn't that the whole idea behind backing up your various CDs/DVDs?
Very faulty logic.
]]>What would happen if someone stole the CD's from my car? Does that mean I can't legally listen to songs that I ripped from them?
]]>If that's illegal I guess I'm a criminal.
]]>@rhys1882:
That is incorrect. IANAL and I can't quote the exact Psalm for you, but I've read it enough times...
Basically you are allowed to make a copy for your own personal use. Period.
At the same time, while it is legal to make a copy for your own use, it became illegal to circumvent any DRM infections to do so. Which, obviously, are two laws that are diametrically opposed - hooray for lobbyists.
At the very least, you can burn .mp3s from your own legally purchased CDs completely legally, so long as you don't do so to a DRM-infected disk. The proper thing to do with a DRM-infected disk is to refuse to buy it in the first place.
]]>@gqcarrick: "They are more concerned about downloaders who buy nothing."
Famous last words!
If the RIAA will go after (as others have pointed out) old ladies and little kids, AND shut down an entire town's wifi (due to one alledged case of file-stealing), I wouldn't put anything past them.
The best thing we can do is to simply avoid purchasing music (in any format) from RIAA-associated labels/artists. There is currently a plethora of excellent independent musicians in all genres who have "something to say" AND market their products without RIAA involvement. (I think there is a website somewhere that maintains a database of RIAA vs. non-RIAA artists.)
]]>wish I had an online calculator to show you the math, but personally, I'd rather take the charitable deduction.
]]>The only thing I will say is rhys would have a better argument if one was buying the CDs ripping them and then reselling them. It is one thing to "space shift" as Diamond Multimedia bring down - it is another thing to resell the music and still keep a copy of it for yourself which would seem to fall outside of what Diamond Media brought down.
]]>You're allowed to make copies of CDs as long as you don't distribute the copy over the internet or give them to your friends.
Another thing to note is that stores simply won't BUY a lot of things. Either there are tons and tons of used copies already around (like, say, a copy of Jagged Little Pill), or it's something that simply doesn't sell, or it's in crap condition. Most stores also won't buy something without artwork, which iPodmeister apparently will.
I sometimes had somebody come in with a bag full of CDs, expecting some giant payout of a few hundred bucks from their largely circa 1998 CDs, and then I proceeded to not buy more than half of what they had and handed out maybe $50. Local stores have to be able to sell what they've bought, whereas iPodmeister is doing a lot of bulk and international business.
Bottom line: if you have a lot of CDs that are either evergreen titles (AC/DC, Zeppelin) or recent releases, all in stellar condition, then, yeah, this service would be a rip-off for you over trading them in to a store. If that's not that case, it's probably a better use of your time, and you're more likely to unload stuff that stores simply won't buy.
]]>This is not true. You can rip your own discs to your own devices for your own use. As long as YOU do it.
What is a violation is getting a rip from someone else, even though you have the disc.
You can't download Elton John's Greatest Hits from bittorrent, even if you have the CD sitting on your shelf. But you CAN rip it yourself.
]]>Someone alert the RIAA so they will shut Apple down!
]]>I don't think the issue is 100% black and white because you may have an argument that you have the right to make a back up copy - though that is a different discussion. The answer to your question of the law that prevents you from making copies of other people's works (even if you already own a copy) is 17 USC 106.
]]>You may be familiar with a little case called Sony v Betamax, in which the Supreme Court of the US determined that time-shifting was legal. Additionally there was a 1999 case, RIAA v Diamond Multimedia, in which it was decided that format-shifting (such as ripping a CD to a computer) was also legal. Between these two decisions, and statements by RIAA counsel stating that ripping for personal use is OK (not that they write the laws, but given they are the ones who would come after you, if they go that far I'm willing to put stock in it), I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you are flat-out wrong.
As far as backup copies, in other words copying a CD you own onto a recordable CD, while there's no specific case law I can cite off the top of my head, it is historically considered fair use to make backup copies. Of course the DMCA prohibits you from circumventing technological restrictions (i.e. DRM) to do so, so DVDs and copy-protected CDs are out, but regular CDs, tapes, vinyl, etc. are all fair game (no pun intended).
]]>@gqcarrick: Have you met the RIAA?
]]>@Wombatish: Who eats at burger king?
Do what you want with your music. I bought music years ago and ripped what I wanted and sold my cds. I don't see anything wrong with that at all. I have not shared the ripped music with anyone and someone got to enjoy the cd I sold at a fraction of the inflated price I bought it at originally.
]]>Just saying... while I agree the RIAA is over-powered and that we have some interesting DRM/Copyright laws in this country, that argument is not a very good one.
]]>I fully plan on starting a box of the CDs/DVDs we would normally donate to the library (we've moved and our new library doesn't take them) and if it ever gets even close to 200 or w/e sending it in.
Yeah, I could -maybe- get a dollar a DVD at a pawnshop or craigslist, but I could also definitely get $300 or w/e for an iPod.
Plus, SO might randomly decide he wants one. Win-win.
]]>I could be wrong, but the google cache link doesn't suggest differently.
]]>@srh: You still realize that artists make nothing or next to nothing on cd sales, correct? They make all their money off of concerts and promotions. So the argument is still sound. The only ones really suffering are the record labels, the ones giving money to the RIAA to file lawsuits against people.
]]>@srh: You do know most artists make little to nothing on cd sales and almost all their money on promotions and concerts, right?
]]>I don't think I'm gonna do that.
]]>Hope they enjoyed the Sweeney Todd!
]]>Z creates a cd, and sells it to A. A rips it, and sells it to B. B rips it, and sells it to C. C rips it, and sells it to D. etc.
Z gets the proceeds for one sale, and everyone keeps the music. How are A, B, C, D, etc.. any different from "downloaders who buy nothing"?
]]>Google Cache: [74.125.95.132]
]]>@FatLynn: You'll have to pry mine out of my cold dead hands! :)
]]>You are proposing stealing something, merely because you can get away with it.
Yes, dishonest people have been doing it for years. Many other people, however, believe in compensating artists and record companies for their time, and obtain music legally.
Golden rule, and all that.
]]>I got the idea by actually looking at their site. They clearly offer digitizing where they will load the iPod with the cds you sent them.
They even have a whole page on their site about it:
[ipodmeister.com] Although it seems to be down now.
They take your old media give you a credit towards a new ipod/hard drive. No where do I see them offering to prefill your new ipod with what you sent them.
]]>@Jimmy-James: I am sure all you get is a brand new iPod.
]]>@jik: And how many people do you know that do that? No one would be the answer to that. With so many ways to aquire music without DRM, they wouldn't know where you got it or aquired it. Unless you admitted to the RIAA that you did it or gave them full access to your hard drive, they would have no clue. Its not like people haven't been doing this for YEARS already.
]]>I'd confirm this on the iPodMeister site but it doesn't seem to be loading right now.
]]>Although if you import your CD into Itunes software it does document that electronically. I also have turned vinyl into mp3's and got rid of the vinyl. I'm willing to risk the lawsuit to avoid moving 80 lbs of vinyl to another apartment.@YouDidWhatNow?:
]]>@YouDidWhatNow?: Good luck proving that. And how would they catch you unless you were either A) Dumb enough to admit it to the RIAA or B) You really pissed someone off and they wanted revenge on you.
I mean be real. They go after downloaders because they can get the most proof from the ISP that the downloaders use. If you have the files ripped off a cd that you used to own, unless you give them total access to your computer, they got nothing.
]]>Exactly. I've been trying to sell my CDs and it's a big pain!
I used to sell CDs here and there on eBay, and it's ridiculous how much work it is for $2-3. Sure if I did it for all my 200 CDs, it'd be $400, but that would be over maybe 1 year? How much time would I have wasted?
I could sell it to a store, but between gas or public transit, I'm spending more money gambling on what they'll take.
I tried listing it in a bulk on Craigslist and Facebook, but people only want 1 or 2 and I'm too lazy to double check what they want.
This is awesome.
]]>Why wouldn't they? All they have to do is demonstrate that you don't have the original item in your possession.
That's considerably easier to do than to prove that it was *you* that downloaded that .mp3. Either you have the CD, or you don't. Black and white.
]]>If you give up the discs, you are legally required to destroy any digital copies you made of them.
]]>@YouDidWhatNow?: I highly doubt the RIAA is coming after someone who bought a cd, ripped the music then is getting rid of the cd. Just sayin'. They are more concerned about downloaders who buy nothing.
]]>@Megalomania: Yea you most likely did, but if you wanted to get rid of your cds how much would you make. Even if you sold them on Amazon there are fees and what not, so you may not end up with too much in the end. This is a good service for someone who doesn't want to spend a lot of time, but still wants to get rid of a lot of old cds.
]]>This sounds too good to be true. Assuming this is on the up-and-up, now how can I get rid of my vinyl, cassettes, and (yes, a few) 8-tracks?
]]>Seems quite intesting if you have a ton of cds or dvds that you want to get rid of that you already ripped all the music off of.
]]>...and remember that if you've burned all your CDs/DVD to digital files, selling/trading/throwing away the original item means you no longer own that product, in any form...so it's illegal to retain your digital copies.
Just sayin'. Keep your disks.
]]>You sell them your CD/DVD, but they make a copy of them and give the content back to you.
You sold your license to the music when you sold them your physical disc. What makes you think you can sell your CDs for an iPod that contains them all?
]]>