« Canada's (Copy)fight for a National Digital Library |
Main
| IBM Does a Creative Commons »
January 11, 2005
Jailed for a Song
Posted by
IPac has just unveiled Jailed for a Song, a new public-awareness campaign that makes it clear that people who support sensible copyright law aren't the radical extremists in this debate:
Jailed for a song? That's what a proposed law would allow. Skipping commercials is stealing? That's what some copyright holders think. And spending millions of taxpayer dollars to hunt down file-sharers? Congress nearly passed not one, but two bills that would have done just that in 2004. Does that sound like the right set of priorities to you?
Copyright infringement is a problem, but the radical political agenda of copyright holders is far beyond what normal Americans want. We need constructive proposals for how to pay artists, protect technical innovation, and end the record & movie companies' crazy litigation campaign. That's why we need your help.
Sign up for the IPac email list and pass the URL along.
Comments (2)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Laws and Regulations
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Apple Jumps Into iBooks - With Hobnailed Boots
- › On the Dissent in Golan v Holder
- › Jonathan Coulton on Megaupload/Piracy
- › Stallman on E-Book Evils & Privacy
- › Admin Update
- › Joe Konrath Claims USD 100,000 E-book Profits in Jan
- › Nate Anderson vs the MPAA
- › SF vs SF Ideas
1. Brad Hutchings on January 13, 2005 1:52 PM writes...
The problem with the two so-called constructive proposals is The Long Tail. BMI or ASCAP may deal effectively with a few hundred thousand registered songs, and voluntary compliance may be quite high because people are reasonable, but nobody addresses how the model scales to tens of millions of works. A free market where people respect the rights of creators to be paid for use of their works is the only acceptable system. And that does not necessarily mean that skipping commercials is stealing. Contemplated legislative missteps by "the copyright industry" are not an excuse for extremism like blanket licensing or treating music as a public good. Such missteps are an excuse for opposing the missteps and continuing a reasonable discussion of the role copyright should play in our society and economy,
Permalink to Comment2. Rafael Venegas on January 22, 2005 12:30 PM writes...
Brad Hutchings states "BMI or ASCAP may deal effectively with a few hundred thousand registered songs".
Please let me rectify with these facts:
a. It is a few hundred million songs.
b. Licensees do net get any catlog. So the licende is for unamend songs. Let us call the catalog a "phantom catalog".
c. Many licensees, for example, a restaurant, have no idea what songs will be performed in their premises, let alone if they are in the "phamtom catalog". So the license is an invitation to infringe.
d. The data base that is published by ASCAP and BMI on the Internet is only a partial listing of songs that are registered.
e. The licenses theoretically cover the songs registered with affiliated foreign performance societies as well. There is even less information available about the songs.
f. Songs that are no longer legal registration because ownership has changed or the song entered its copyright renewal period or the public domain are retained in the "phamton catalog".
g. Many recordings list song without the author name names and many song names are repeated many tiemes or a hundred times. How then does a licensee of ASCAP or BMI determine that a given song is licensed and can be performed?
Has anyone ever heard at a readio programs or restaurant where people call to request songs get a reply saying "we will check the ASCAP catalog and if the song is there we wll play it?
I have called radio stations many times to inquire about their use of inherited song rights that belong to my siblings and always get the same reply, they have a license from ASCAP or BMI, when in fact they do not.
The strange and weird thing is that all licensees, such a broadcasters and restaurants are aware of these failings and say nothing.
Permalink to Comment