Universal sues MySpace for copyright violations

TalkBack 39 of 79:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

I have made no assumptions

This is an exact quote of the statute;

(1) When phonorecords of a nondramatic musical work have been distributed to the public in the United States under the authority of the copyright owner, any other person, including those who make phonorecords or digital phonorecord deliveries, may, by complying with the provisions of this section, obtain a compulsory license to make and distribute phonorecords of the work. A person may obtain a compulsory license only if his or her primary purpose in making phonorecords is to distribute them to the public for private use, including by means of a digital phonorecord delivery. A person may not obtain a compulsory license for use of the work in the making of phonorecords duplicating a sound recording fixed by another, unless:

(i) such sound recording was fixed lawfully; and

(ii) the making of the phonorecords was authorized by the owner of copyright in the sound recording or, if the sound recording was fixed before February 15, 1972, by any person who fixed the sound recording pursuant to an express license from the owner of the copyright in the musical work or pursuant to a valid compulsory license for use of such work in a sound recording.

They get no choice. How can any sane person argue that is what it says? It says no such thing!

As far as about a nickel per download or less
(it's actually about $0.08 - $0.025)... That is what the labels are paying the artist now.

http://www.musicbizacademy.com/articles/dl_newmedia.htm
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=14495
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/10/PK6590.DTL
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/03/itunes_royalty_fight/

In fact through iTunes this is how it breaks down for the artist;

Artist iTunes Royalty
$0.99 download single song price to the consumer
less $0.34 to Apple
left $0.65 x 130% (wholesale markup)
x 12% (net artist net rate) = $0.10 Producer iTunes Royalty
$0.99 download single song price to the consumer
less $0.34 to Apple
left $0.65 x 130% (wholesale markup)
x 3% (producer rate) = $0.025


The artist are getting the shaft now by the labels. This is why many have started giving away their tracks for free themselves.

You are wrong on both counts- that they have a choice and that the labels are paying them fairly now- neither is true.

Finally the RIAA has publicly stated they believe transfering songs from CD to your iPod is infringement or did you forget this quote;

These devices are just repositories for stolen music, and they all know it," UMG chairman/CEO Doug Morris says. "So it's time to get paid for it."

Not only that but in the last DMCA exception hearings they said the same thing and they said the same thing to congress when trying to get the radio flag passed- they are still trying on that one by attaching it to unrelated appropriation bills.

That is besides the fact that in the Grokster case the attorneys for the RIAA specifically told the justices that it would be legal to do so and in the RIO case the court ruled it would fall under fair use/the AHRA.

Posted by: Edward Meyers   Posted on: 11/19/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now