Is it legal to share "boosted" music?

[KillaCam]

Not looking to profit money from it, I probably should have put that in.

[MrSkippyJ]

It's legal unless you slow them & stuff for a profit iirc.

you can't distribute other peoples copyrighted material regardless of profit or not

[RobDH]

Copyright Implications

Because remixes may borrow heavily from an existing piece of music (possibly more than one), the issue of intellectual property becomes a concern. The most important question is whether a remixer is free to redistribute his or her work, or whether the remix falls under the category of a derivative work according to, for example, United States copyright law. Of note are open questions concerning the legality of visual works, like the art form of collage, which can be plagued with licensing issues.

There are two obvious extremes with regard to derivative works. If the song is substantively dissimilar in form (for example, it might only borrow a motif which is modified, and be completely different in all other respects), then it may not necessarily be a derivative work (depending on how heavily modified the melody and chord progressions were). On the other hand, if the remixer only changes a few things (for example, the instrument and tempo), then it is clearly a derivative work and subject to the copyrights of the original work's copyright holder.

Fair use, a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work, is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. The term fair use originated in the United States. A similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

Noncommercial use is invariably fair. Not true, though a judge may take the profit motive or lack thereof into account. In L.A. Times v. Free Republic, the court found that the noncommercial use of L.A. Times content by the Free Republic Web site was in fact not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.

If it's not fair use, it's copyright infringement. Fair use is only one of many limitations, exceptions, and defenses to copyright infringement. For instance, the Audio Home Recording Act establishes that it is legal in some circumstances to make copies of audio recordings for non-commercial personal use.[28]

It's copyrighted, so it can't be fair use. On the contrary, fair use applies only to copyrighted works, describing conditions under which copyrighted material may be used without permission. If a work is not copyrighted, fair use does not come into play, since public-domain works can be used for any purpose without violating copyright law.

Note: In some countries (including the United States of America), the mere creation of a work establishes copyright over it, and there is no legal requirement to register or declare copyright ownership

So in all that, not it is not. Unless granted by the artist to be able to do so. IE: Artist shares it for free (like some youtube songs will have a link to free download), they added a dislaimer to the song/album stating it can be used and so forth.

[DJ Droppin]

Definitely illegal and grounds for lawsuits, yet this is violated all the time here.

Edited October 4, 2011 by DJ Droppin

[KillaCam]

Definitely illegal and grounds for lawsuits, yet this is violated all the time here.

I don't think it's violated much here, there's strict rules about pirating here and sharing copyrighted files.

[KillaCam]

So am I right with this conclusion? Its illegal to do this with regular copyright tracks but obviously legal to do with mixtape and free songs.

[smokeumtires]

I has country bass mixes

[STEvil]

So am I right with this conclusion? Its illegal to do this with regular copyright tracks but obviously legal to do with mixtape and free songs.

Yes.

And it is violated very often here. Every single download link for a slowed & boosted song is illegal. Not that it much matters as in the end we are doing this for non-commercial use and are increasing exposure for the artist. Some artists are cool with it, some are dicks with lawyers attached to their testicles.

[Mr. Darkjustice]

So am I right with this conclusion? Its illegal to do this with regular copyright tracks but obviously legal to do with mixtape and free songs.

Yes.

And it is violated very often here. Every single download link for a slowed & boosted song is illegal. Not that it much matters as in the end we are doing this for non-commercial use and are increasing exposure for the artist. Some artists are cool with it, some are dicks with lawyers attached to their testicles.

maybe if artists actually cared about the quality of their songs instead of passing out crap it wouldnt be

[brownm3]

If you take a normal track off a cd and alter it in any way (chopped & screwed, bass boosted) is it then legal to share it?

I think so, as long as you do not sell it for profit.

Right?