Copyright laws already allow the recording of songs (or TV & Movies) for personal (Fair) use. Copyright laws are not designed to hinder invention or innovation, but rather to spur the role of creativity in society, and to allow artists to profit from their own creativity.

I know the RIAA is playing big gorilla with big stick, but I’m willing to bet this isn’t as much about keeping one person making a personal recording on X,Y, or Z media, as it is about mass re-distribution of copyrighted material through a venue where someone is paying, be it advertisers or subscribers.

I think your take on copyright is a bit harsh or biased, and somewhat understandable in light of hollywood & media lawyers. But I think the problem is with the nature of the media conglomerates, their lawyers, and the scope and reach of new technologies, not copyright laws themselves – which your post seems to impart. If a company like Nike or Pepsi willfully stole one of my photos, and used it in a national ad campaign without my permission, I’d be damn happy this country allows me to sue them for up to $150K in statutory damages. Like many things in life, good Laws can be used, or abused.