PDA

View Full Version : Buying Music You Used to Own



fairyliquidizer
2006-03-09, 03:43
So much of my money now goes on music I used to own. Most of this is indi/industrial or heavy metal (depending on the period in my life). I hate buying something for the 2nd or 3rd time. My vinyl collection was stolen and my "backup tapes" are long since lost or sound lo fi by todays standards.

When I was a lad I used to snear at Best of... albums but they are one way I can overcome my dislike for buying an album again (partially). I just ordered Deep Purple: The Platinum Collection and feel "dirty" (http://www5.cd-wow.com/detail_results.php?product_code=16845). One of the things that drove me to this was trying to buy Machinehead and finding that I could buy an Anniversary edition which appears to have had all the tracks remixed. Lovely!

Anyone else struggle with these feelings? Is buying old music a sign of growing old?

Fairy

bernt
2006-03-09, 05:13
Is buying old music a sign of growing old? Yes!

Everytime my wife order a DVD movie I also put in an order for some oldies that I use to own.

Nazareth
Toto
Styx
Saga
Pink Floyd
Judas Priest
Gary Moore
and so on...

m1abrams
2006-03-09, 06:56
10 years later I am still trying to recover from have over 200 CDs stolen. Needless to say I now have FLAC backups of my CDs and backups of my FLAC.

Some of the music stolen will never be replaced, alot of local band music from my college days. Those are the ones I miss the most!

tom permutt
2006-03-09, 07:06
Anyone else struggle with these feelings? Is buying old music a sign of growing old?

Fairy
Yes and yes.

Cleve
2006-03-09, 07:40
Hard for me to buy old music now - those old recordings from the 70's and 60s seem so flat and lifeless on my current system.

Remastered "Houses of the Holy" by Zeppelin wasn't too bad though, considering how bad I thought the vinyl Atlantic releases sounded, when I bought them new in the early 70s.

hal9000
2006-03-09, 09:24
I am buying more old music than ever right now (currently I'm beefing up my late 70s early 80s rock/metal collection...the group Gamma with Ronnie Montrose on guitar is my latest obsession). I think I'm just enjoying how great all of these old albums sound on the SB2...the SB2 combined with some of the great mastering work DCC and MFSL have done really breathes new life in to older music.

-hal

snarlydwarf
2006-03-09, 09:39
The vast majority of my purchases lately are for things that were originally issued in the 60's to 80's... Most of the newer albums are from people who started long long ago. Much of it is part of the endless "convert all the vinyl to CD" process that has been going on for 20 years in spurts, but most is still "things that I should have bought but never did."

There are some exceptions, but I guess it's a sign of getting old^H^H^Hwiser when I start buying Sinatra...

Kids these days have no taste in music.

ceejay
2006-03-09, 10:46
Buying music I used to own - certainly, and its definitely a sign of age/wisdom/experience etc. Though if I ever regress to the point of buying Sinatra I shall probably ask my wife and kids to shoot me, and they would probably oblige!

A variation on this theme, I find, is buying music that I thought I'd owned but can't now find any trace of. Was it perhaps "borrowed" a long time ago? Lost in a move? Or did I just dream it? Was it one of those albums that "everyone" owns and I just assumed I did? Or am I just going senile?

Ceejay

zooropa320
2006-03-09, 13:21
Wow. Where did all the Sinatra haters come from?

Allmusic.com's bio starts with:
"Frank Sinatra was arguably the most important popular music figure of the 20th century, his only real rivals for the title being Bing Crosby, Elvis Presley, and the Beatles."

Everyone should have at least 1 Sinatra compilation album in their collection in my opinion. I don't listen to him very often but its nice when one of his songs comes up at random.

I'm primarily a hard rock/heavy metal fan.

snarlydwarf
2006-03-09, 13:45
I don't hate Sinatra.. I actually have several of his albums. Something I never would have thought ten years ago.

I 'discovered' his talent via my obsession with Brazilian music, oddly enough. A lot of Brazilian singers choose old standards like Fly Me To The Moon that Sinatra made famous.

Though Paula Toller's version of it is a thousand times better than Sinatra's.

And, yes, I random play from the Residents -> Sinatra -> King Crimson -> Bach...

tom permutt
2006-03-09, 13:46
Sinatra was a really, really good singer. I find the later Vegas showroom arrangements, after the demise of the best big bands, hard to take, though.

I'm not so sure about "important," all the same. He did what he did, better than anyone else, but how much influence did it have on what anyone else did? Indeed, this may be the crux: some of us still listen to music in a dead style just to hear Sinatra, and some don't, but you won't find many fans of any of the lesser "boy singers" any more.

artintampa
2011-11-28, 09:38
I can't possibly retrace all the musical changes I've been through. I have always been into rock/blues but the artists and styles have varied greatly. With two kids and a wife that 'misplace' everything, I know I will not bother trying. I have literally have bought 5 copies of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon, 4 copies of Eric Clapton Unplugged etc etc. I now own them and they are well hidden!

I am now carefully replacing very key albums and ripping it into the computer and hiding the original copy.

InTheBath
2011-11-28, 11:00
I went through a phase of rebuying a lot of stuff when I started putting my files onto the computer.

I went through a frankly ludicrous process of copying some vinyl into flac files and have since rebought as some of it has been released.

I'm occasionally tempted by SACD to buy something for a second or third time, but have so far resisted the temptation.

What's anybody's maximum iteration? I've got a few Costello albums that I had on vinyl and have bought twice on CD - partly due to extra tracks being added to a remastered album.

David Bowie did me a favour by taking tracks off the albums when they were remastered - made my decisions a lot easier.

M.

PS: Couldn't live without Sinatra. Late at night when the single malt is running out, In The Wee Small Hours or Only The Lonely are de-rigeur.

dasmueller
2011-11-28, 11:16
What I have been doing lately is going to the public library and borrowing Cds of old music I do not currently have. If they are deemed worthy I then rip to my PC.

MeSue
2011-11-28, 12:00
Did anyone else grow up in a church youth group where they'd have these record burning parties to cleanse yourself of the "evil" rock music? Ugh, it makes me sick thinking about how much music I "lost" that way. I am still re-discovering and reacquiring some of it. Thankfully, in my later teens we changed churches and I had a youth pastor who loved rock music.

I guess today it would be a CD burning party and would mean something completely different. ;)

emalvick
2011-11-28, 15:31
I laugh a bit because I've been going through this recently (and in the past). I'd say about 15 years ago I went through this process of ripping all my music into mp3's (give or take according to when MP3's became the thing).

During that process, I found empty disc cases or scratched discs that I just couldn't rip. So, I end up with purchase number 2 of many albums. Now, I'm in the process of ripping my music to FLAC format and again having bad luck finding CD's or scratched discs and again I am buying discs.

Fortunately, none of the discs are repeat offenders. Never-the-less, I can think of 3 albums I have purchased multiple (3+) times. I'm too young to have had LP's first, but I had tapes that I then purchased CDs that have since been scratched, remastered, etc.

With my current FLAC reripping, if a disc is scratched, it has to be really good for me to rebuy. If it isn't, then I am keeping the mp3's and saying the hell with having it in FLAC or in some cases the album altogether (delete the files and toss the disc).

Dark Side of the Moon is one album I've purchased many many times. Achtung Baby is another. I can't live without owning the discs.

audiomuze
2011-11-28, 21:22
I guess I did a lot of replacing tapes with CDs when CDs became mainstream, so I've probably repurchased around 30% of my collection - most of my collecting was done post introduction of CD. I've also managed to hang onto most/all of my CDs and keep them on pristine condition, so there have been very few (perhaps two) repurchased CDs resulting from damaged media. There have, however, been late night shopping sprees on Amazon where I've inadvertently purchased something I already own - Annie Lennox Live in Central Park springs to mind.

Where I can see myself buying certain albums again though is when decent high resolution stuff becomes available (not the crap from HDTracks.com which is mostly upscaled CD passed off as high resolution or otherwise compressed and limited to hell) e.g. Pink Floyd's Immersion series. The stereo rips off the bluray are great - high resolution with dynamic range intact - best these albums have ever sounded. Waiting patiently for the Wall.

gruntwolla
2011-11-30, 14:31
Did anyone else grow up in a church youth group where they'd have these record burning parties to cleanse yourself of the "evil" rock music? )

Thankfully not! Where and when was this?

Trev

castalla
2011-11-30, 16:31
Can't you hazard a guess?????!!!!

garym
2011-11-30, 17:13
Thankfully not! Where and when was this?

Trev

In the late 60s and early 70s in Texas this was going on all around the town where I lived!!

castalla
2011-11-30, 17:50
Texas? Who would have ever guessed that?!!!

garym
2011-11-30, 17:53
Texas? Who would have ever guessed that?!!!

;-). Yeah but think of all the great musicians born in Texas.

castalla
2011-11-30, 18:08
For every reaction, there's a counter-reaction?

MeSue
2011-11-30, 18:40
In the late 60s and early 70s in Texas this was going on all around the town where I lived!!

By early 80's it had spread to Florida. ;) Was it Led Zeppelin played backwards that says to worship the devil?

garym
2011-11-30, 18:47
By early 80's it had spread to Florida. ;) Was it Led Zeppelin played backwards that says to worship the devil?

I was thinking that CHURCHES BURNING RECORDS would make a good punk band name, and what do you know:
http://www.myspace.com/burningchurchrecords

dasmueller
2011-11-30, 18:48
Ray Bradbury Farenheit 451. Mindboggling goofieness

garym
2011-11-30, 18:55
Ray Bradbury Farenheit 451. Mindboggling goofieness

Ah. Perfect!

Fahzz
2011-11-30, 19:01
Ray Bradbury Farenheit 451. Mindboggling goofieness

Not always. In my day people also burned disco records.

MeSue
2011-11-30, 20:47
I was thinking that CHURCHES BURNING RECORDS would make a good punk band name...

Love it! Not surprisingly, my punk rock phase came along not long after the record burning phase.


In my day people also burned disco records.

Those should still be burned. ;)

garym
2011-11-30, 20:50
Love it! Not surprisingly, my punk rock phase came along not long after the record burning phase.

Always does. ;-)

pski
2011-11-30, 22:19
An interesting question would be:

I have the album (vinyl) so I have the right to get the same content from wherever.

How could this be different from copying the vinyl to digital?

P

Soulkeeper
2011-12-01, 07:32
Was it Led Zeppelin played backwards that says to worship the devil?

EVERYTHING* played backwards says to worship the devil.

(So the morale is: Don't play things backwards..?) :p

* Except W.A.S.P. (We Are Satan's People) of course. W.A.S.P. played backwards says "WWJD?". To which the answer is probably to play things backwards.

MeSue
2011-12-01, 10:11
EVERYTHING* played backwards says to worship the devil.

(So the morale is: Don't play things backwards..?) :p

* Except W.A.S.P. (We Are Satan's People) of course. W.A.S.P. played backwards says "WWJD?". To which the answer is probably to play things backwards.
Ha! Makes sense to me.

Gillinger
2011-12-19, 07:58
An interesting question would be:

I have the album (vinyl) so I have the right to get the same content from wherever.

How could this be different from copying the vinyl to digital?

P

I've been pondering the legal, moral and ethical questions as well. I have a lot of vinyl records. I can either convert them to FLAC (I have all the necesasary equipment) or I can find a Torrent site (or similar) where someone has already done it, and download from there. Guess which is the easiest (and which I do)? I went through the phase of replacing vinyl with CD so most record companies have had my money twice (three times in some cases). Well not any more! Thank you Internet.

Anyway, quite a lot of my vinyl was either never released on CD or was and has been deleted. I no longer have a record deck setup so what am I supposed to do?

Consider the moral, ethical or legal aspects of the following and tell me if you've never done any of these:

1. You listened to the Top 20 show on the radio and taped it so you could listen to it again.
2. You borrowed an album from a friend, which you then taped.
3. You taped an album for a friend.
4. You made a "special" tape for a girl/boy friend.
5. You bought a 2nd hand CD, album or tape.
6. You sold any of the above.
7. You made a copy of an album to listen to in the car.

I'm sure there are many more examples, but the bottom line with all of these is that they infringe copyright in some way, so are illegal, and the record company/band/whoever aren't getting their royalties on any of these copies.

As far as I'm concerned, these days, if I have a copy of the original in any format, I'm morally entitled to make or download a copy for my own use. And yes, I do delete the "extra" tracks if I don't already have them!

emalvick
2011-12-19, 13:46
As far as I'm concerned, these days, if I have a copy of the original in any format, I'm morally entitled to make or download a copy for my own use. And yes, I do delete the "extra" tracks if I don't already have them!

The biggest problem I would have with your statement is the moral entitlement to downloading a copy. It isn't so much that you shouldn't have the right to have a backup copy of what you already own. Rather, the person who made that album available isn't morally entitled to give it away. Someone out there too their copy made a backup and then distributed it for anyone to take.

Or imagine you taking an album you own, making your digital backup and then also giving it away to everyone.

The biggest problem with the current state of piracy vs. the examples you brought up from the past is that the past was often a case of distributing to a handful of people at most (say you copied an album for a few of your friends). Now, people can essentially distribute an album to 1000's or more people very easily.

It's just something to think about. The problems with downloading music should be thought of from the morals of the supplier as well as the one receiving the files. Not downloading doesn't necessarily make a difference, but at least when I do download (and I am guilty of downloading at times) that even owning an album that I download won't absolve me of the legal issues that could come with that action.

Gillinger
2011-12-20, 02:26
Emalvick, I agree with your post entirely, and from a legal point of view I (we) are in the wrong, but the thing is that Pandora's box has now been opened and until someone closes it again (ha!ha!) I'm going to save myself a lot of time and effort by downloading a version of an album I already own. Here in the UK at least, everyone who has transferred their music to computer or Ipod is currently breaking the law, although the government has finally recognised that the law needs to be changed (see here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14384268).

pski
2011-12-20, 08:15
Copying CD's is perfectly legal in the United States so long as the copies are for "fair use" which is basically personal, educational, or archival purposes. Software to copy CD's is completely OK.

Because there is ambiguity in the definition of fair use, considerable flexibility exists. For example, the Supreme Court ruled that "time shifting" a complete TV show with a Betamax is completely legal, even though the percentage of a work copied is a factor for consideration.

In cases where the copy is a duplicate of already owned material, it would be very difficult to make a case denying fair use.

Interestingly, copying DVD/HD/Bluray is also legal and a person does not break the law by copying their own material. What IS illegal is "to manufacture or traffic in a device or tool that permits a consumer to make such copies."

In short, the illegality is derived from bypassing the copy protection in video media since audio CD's do not have copy protection.

p

emalvick
2011-12-21, 13:28
pski,

You're right. Making your own backup is ok. And I don't think there is anything even horribly wrong about Gillinger's method, which I have done myself.

The fair use law is being broken by those who are distributing the music we download. Add to that the fact that when using Torrent type systems, we are allowing the music to be distributed, which is probably easy to show is a violation of fair use... thus all the issue over torrent sites.

Never-the-less, that Pandora's box is open, and many people take advantage of it. I only make my comment because it is something I do think consider, and I do let it influence my decision when I do buy a second copy of something, especially when it comes to smaller/independent type artists.

Echo
2011-12-21, 22:53
Copying CD's is perfectly legal in the United States so long as the copies are for "fair use" which is basically personal, educational, or archival purposes.

I don't believe that it's that simple and clear cut. Fair use is intended for a different purpose and is always judged on a case-by-case basis using four 'tests'; making a copy of an entire works is rarely deemed to be fair use.

Copyright law (not fair use) addresses making a backup of a CD and making a backup of a CD is permitted provided ownership of the original work is retained, that the copy is used for personal use only, and no copyright protection was circumvented in making the copy. Also note that the backup must be destroyed if the original is no longer in a person's possession.

However, I agree 100% that we are in a time of massive change due to current technologies.

RonM
2011-12-23, 05:57
Also note that the backup must be destroyed if the original is no longer in a person's possession.


Ironic, isn't it, that the PURPOSE of making a back-up (a spare if the original dies) is therefore nullified.

r.

RonM
2011-12-23, 06:04
Irony aside, there are a number of interesting issues here.

I have a lot of CDs which have all been ripped. The ripped music lives on my music server, and the CDs are in my possession, carefully filed away in box after box in my storeroom.

I also have a great deal of legally downloaded (paid for) music. What exactly constitutes the original here, I wonder? The copies I make for backup purposes are actually identical in form and content to the originals, just in a different location. What is the "original" from which derives my right to a "copy"?

Of course, I'm interested in security. If my house burns down, it will take my original CDs with it, along with the copies on my computers. Therefore I make back-ups that I store in a reasonably secure place -- a safety deposit box at my bank. Little portable hard drives are SO useful.

These represent a third copy -- original, original rip, and copy, or the analog for downloaded/purchased music. I wonder what the rule is about this generation?

And if all that is left of my CDs are lumps of mostly burned plastic, does possessing this still give me a right to my rips?

Ron

aubuti
2011-12-23, 06:52
Ironic, isn't it, that the PURPOSE of making a back-up (a spare if the original dies) is therefore nullified.
Not necessarily. If the original is scratched to hell then you can play your backup, and keep the scratched original as evidence of your rights to have that music.

But the letter of the law would also seem to imply that if the original is stolen, you would be obligated to destroy the backup, because the original is floating around somewhere. And in case of fire, you would also probably need to destroy the backup. Before easy digital backups, the usual solution for that was simple: insurance. But legal thinking on this doesn't seemed to have moved past the late 20th century.

As for keeping molten lumps of burned CDs as evidence of ownership for your backups (and not filing an insurance claim), that's an interesting question.

For legal downloads, I think the proof of ownership you'll need if the RIAA comes breaking through your door is some equivalent of a sales receipt, such as credit card receipts or perhaps the order history from the vendor.

emalvick
2011-12-23, 09:55
The recent examples are where I think the laws get a bit ridiculous and the reason the ethics of the issue get confusing.

I (as well as all of us) have probably backed up our CD's to some extent, otherwise we wouldn't be using squeezeboxes. I am guessing that most of us have kept the originals, so we aren't necessarily breaking any laws there, and how one obtains backups is not the issue at this point.

When it has come to the scratched discs, I've replaced them with copies, although I haven't necessarily kept the discs (just the cases). Before copies were easy to make I'd buy a new copy, and even now I'll buy a new copy if it is a favorite album.

As far as theft and fire go, I know we are supposed to destroy the copies. I also assume that insurance should cover the originals, so in theory one could buy all the discs again as well. Never-the-less, I really doubt that the RIAA and others are going to come after you for keeping copies.

I would not be tempted to keep a pile of melted plastic to prove I owned my albums. I'm not sure I'd go back and buy every album I owned either. It may not be right, but I'm not going to feel as bad about it as I would if I blatantly sold my CD's and kept the digital copies.

All that being said, I have to laugh because one time my car was broken into, and the would-be thefts obviously dug through my CD folders in my car. Ultimately, they stole nothing. I had a lot of CD's thrown about my car, some scratched, but none of them were missing. Apparently my taste in music (hard rock and jazz) were not up to the desire of the thief.

pski
2011-12-23, 13:14
Irony aside, there are a number of interesting issues here.

I have a lot of CDs which have all been ripped. The ripped music lives on my music server, and the CDs are in my possession, carefully filed away in box after box in my storeroom.

I also have a great deal of legally downloaded (paid for) music. What exactly constitutes the original here, I wonder? The copies I make for backup purposes are actually identical in form and content to the originals, just in a different location. What is the "original" from which derives my right to a "copy"?

Of course, I'm interested in security. If my house burns down, it will take my original CDs with it, along with the copies on my computers. Therefore I make back-ups that I store in a reasonably secure place -- a safety deposit box at my bank. Little portable hard drives are SO useful.

These represent a third copy -- original, original rip, and copy, or the analog for downloaded/purchased music. I wonder what the rule is about this generation?

And if all that is left of my CDs are lumps of mostly burned plastic, does possessing this still give me a right to my rips?

Ron

The number of backup generations is not material as long as you have them. You don't buy the music, you buy the right to listen to it.

Of course you have to backup the digital versions ! That's just plain sense. It's not a question of if the drive will fail, it's when.

As to catastrophe: you need to keep a backup off-site as well.

P

emalvick
2011-12-23, 13:53
You don't buy the music, you buy the right to listen to it.


That is actually the most important statement, and it is often lost in these discussions (meaning copyright discussions everywhere).

It then makes you wonder what exactly established that right. Does the destruction or theft of your CD's eliminate your right to listen to it?

I don't think the laws are straight forward on that answer.

I seem to recall a recent decision (in US court, although I'm not sure if it was the Supreme Court) that decided that it was ok to break DRM for the purpose of making back-up copies for one-self. That decision seemed to contradict other copyright related laws because once you strip DRM, how is one going to know whether you actually have a right to a digital file or not.

These things really get confusing, and I am not sure who it affects the most.

pski
2011-12-23, 17:56
That is actually the most important statement, and it is often lost in these discussions (meaning copyright discussions everywhere).

It then makes you wonder what exactly established that right. Does the destruction or theft of your CD's eliminate your right to listen to it?

I don't think the laws are straight forward on that answer.

I seem to recall a recent decision (in US court, although I'm not sure if it was the Supreme Court) that decided that it was ok to break DRM for the purpose of making back-up copies for one-self. That decision seemed to contradict other copyright related laws because once you strip DRM, how is one going to know whether you actually have a right to a digital file or not.

These things really get confusing, and I am not sure who it affects the most.

The issue I cite is the case with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_X_Copy . This article in Wikipedia has been altered since I was there years ago. It no long contains details of the ruling.

Look around and post more.

P

emalvick
2011-12-27, 11:51
The issue I cite is the case with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_X_Copy . This article in Wikipedia has been altered since I was there years ago. It no long contains details of the ruling.

Look around and post more.

P

The case I was referring to was either in 2010 or even 2011. I'll have to try and track it down. It was being followed closely on a Kindle Forum I was frequently when I purchased a Kindle for my wife and wanted to strip the DRM from her ebooks for archiving.

Without digging too much, the following exerpt from the DMCA essentially states that the DMCA law cannot trump Fair Use laws:

Title 17 > Chapter 12 > 1201, Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_17_00001201----000-.html

(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected.(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

I cannot find the case that I believed used the above to allow jailbreaking of iphones. I think this is the opening that is allowing DRM to be removed, but I could be wrong on the details. I'm not much into laws or the loopholes, technicalities, etc. and their implications. I also didn't read the linked rule above very thoroughly.

gruntwolla
2011-12-27, 16:42
Also note that the backup must be destroyed if the original is no longer in a person's possession.

.

That is a horrible thought.I know of somebody who lost his entire collection of cds and albums in a fire, and considers himself extremely fortunate that he had digitalised his collection. This was done in order to use Squeezeboxes, rather than for backup purposes, but nevertheless he would be distraught at the thought of being forced to personally delete all his files

RonM
2011-12-27, 16:57
Yes, it is a ridiculous irony isn't it? On the one hand lip service is paid to the notion that "you buy the content not the medium", implying that it's the intellectual property in the music that you have "rented", but on the other hand making your posession of that IP only legal when you have the physical medium. Makes no actual sense, as is the case with much of this fuzzy area of law.

What we see is an attempt to make IP possession like physical possession. If your stereo goes up in flames you don't get to claim possession of the IP that is embodied in the device and makes it work. You need to go to your insurance company and try to recover the value, and then repurchase the stereo. The logic is that you can do the same with your music.

My careful backing up of all my music files is for two purposes -- to protect against the inevitable hardware failures, and to protect against catastrophic loss of both electronic and hard copies. I fully expect to re-use my backed up library (the one stored in my bank's safety deposit vault) if my house burns down, and I doubt very much if anyone is going to try to force me to repurchase all the music.

On the other hand, if I DO try to claim the value of the melted and burned CDs from the insurance company, as I'd be sorely tempted to do given that there are many thousands of dollars in that pot, there is a legitimate question as to whether I can make a reasonable case for retention of the digital files stored at the bank.

R.

aubuti
2011-12-27, 18:25
On the other hand, if I DO try to claim the value of the melted and burned CDs from the insurance company, as I'd be sorely tempted to do given that there are many thousands of dollars in that pot, there is a legitimate question as to whether I can make a reasonable case for retention of the digital files stored at the bank.
I would bet that the insurance company would consider it fraud rather than "a reasonable question." On the other hand, if you made a claim on the basis that you had to repurchase the CDs to satisfy requirement of retaining the original medium to go with your backup copies, I would think they would have to agree (albeit grudgingly, because they are an insurance company). But as a practical matter it's hard to imagine them enforcing the repurchase.

All of which makes the download model look eminently more sensible than buying CDs. If only more artists and recording companies made CD-quality-or-better tracks available for download.

Echo
2011-12-28, 00:38
On the other hand, if I DO try to claim the value of the melted and burned CDs from the insurance company, as I'd be sorely tempted to do given that there are many thousands of dollars in that pot

No reason why you shouldn't make a claim. As a proactive step, you should have some sort of documented proof of ownership (receipts, photos of the collection). It'd also be a good idea to have your CD and DVD collection mentioned specifically in the insurance policy with an approximate value and insist that the insurance company visit your home to verify ownership. This also applies to any non-typical household items of value such as artwork, silver, crystal, china, jewelery, furniture, electronics, etc.

Gillinger
2011-12-28, 03:30
This proof of ownership thing would be interesting in the case of an insurance claim. There's no way I could provide a receipt for an item I bought in the 60's and I'm certainly not going to photograph my entire collection. That would prove nothing except that I had that particular item in my house on that day. If an insurance company can find a way to wiggle out of paying... As you say, inviting the insurance company in to your house to cataloe your collection would be viable, but (I would bet) extremely expensive.

Also, a lot of items are irreplaceable, especially the vinyl. In the case of Itunes, proving that you've downloaded the mp3s when your computer has gone up in smoke would be a very time consuming business!

pski
2011-12-28, 08:31
This proof of ownership thing would be interesting in the case of an insurance claim. There's no way I could provide a receipt for an item I bought in the 60's and I'm certainly not going to photograph my entire collection. That would prove nothing except that I had that particular item in my house on that day. If an insurance company can find a way to wiggle out of paying... As you say, inviting the insurance company in to your house to cataloe your collection would be viable, but (I would bet) extremely expensive.

Also, a lot of items are irreplaceable, especially the vinyl. In the case of Itunes, proving that you've downloaded the mp3s when your computer has gone up in smoke would be a very time consuming business!

For CD's I would think a photo of the collection and a corresponding offsite digital backup could verify the number of involved disks.

For albums, I would pan the jackets backs (in their peach crates in my case) and take a photo of the whole group. I keep my half-speeds separate as well to make their value easier to break-out.

Lost in the latest iCloud announcements is the fact that you can now download (again) anything you bought from Apple. (0 items in my case.)

P