It may be illegal to edit recording depending on where you live. In addition there is the likely chance of licensing fees that should be paid to the original artist if you play the samples / tracks in a public forum. iTunes is subject to DRM (Digital Rights Management) for the vast majority of tracks available so Wave Pad, Mixpad and Switch are severely constrained with what they are able to do with those tracks.
=======================================================================
I don't know where on earth you get this!! It appears to me that you have been "brainwashed" by certain individuals with connections to the recording industry, which is forever attempting to "rewrite" the laws (without the use of those irrelevant legislators) to further its own perverted interests. In point of fact, such (editing) activity is controlled by the "fair use" of copyrighted material under the _federal_ copyright law, which has nothing whatsoever to do with "where you live". The fair use of a copyrighted CD permits you to edit the sound files contained on a CD, _provided_ that (1) the CD which contains these files remains in your possession as long as your edits remain in existence, and (2) the edited material is retained for your personal use.
As much as he would like to do so, the copyright owner cannot subvert the fair use provisions of the federal copyright law, under the cover of a license agreement. When push comes to shove, what DRM is all about is the use of physical means to prevent the user from doing what he/she is entitled to do under fair use. Under the copyright law, the owner of a copyrighted music CD is entitled to make backups of that software (as long as these copies are not distributed without the original), _whether or not the copyright owner agrees with this_.
The copyright owner's use of copy-prevention techniques has existed since the first Apple computer was introduced for personal use. DRM is an extension of these same shop-worn copyright-evasion concepts in the modern computer age, where new hardware for music storage and playback seems to spring up almost daily. DRM permits the music copyright owner to forcefully prevent the users of copyrighted material to exercise their legal rights, but without being confronted by those nasty provisions of the copyright law that _he_ doesn't like. From the music copyright holder's perspective: "If you can't force them (users) to do what you want them to do, by using the copyright law as your enforcement vehicle, then use DRM as your own personal enforcement vehicle." And oh yes, be sure to continuously "educate" users to the "fact" that they are not permitted to do what the federal copyright law (which _cannot_ be superseded by any state licensing law) permits them to do!
Let me repeat, since it undoubtedly needs repeating. The fact that DRM may prevent WavePad from doing what WavePad is designed to do is not evidence, per se, that the user who wishes to do what DRM prevents him/her from doing would be in violation of the law if he/she were able to do what the copyright owner doesn't want being done. If you possess unimagined evidence (i.e., either from the lawbooks or from case law) that there is any law, either federal or state, which prohibits the owner of a copyrighted music CD from editing the sound files on that CD _for his/her own personal use_, then please present that evidence here in this discussion forum. I would certainly like to see it. After you do this, we can continue with our dialogue on this subject (although I believe that such discussion rightfully belongs in a legal forum), now that it has been introduced here and you have responded (incorrectly, in my opinion) to the poster's question.
Musikone
(and much, much more!)