4 edits | United States Copyright Royalty Board ?? For those who have heard of the Copyright Office and the Library of Congress and their parts in copyright management, but have never heard of the United States Copyright Royalty Board, here is a link to their web site:
»www.loc.gov/crb/
Here are the 3 guys who make the decisions on royalty rates:
»www.loc.gov/crb/background/crb-judges.html
Here is the web page with links to written testimony that led up to this decision:
»www.loc.gov/crb/proceedings/
Participants in the hearings that led to the decision:
»www.loc.gov/crb/proceedings/2005···icipants
A question I have is where were all these music streaming groups with their comments on the hearings that have been ongoing thru 2006? They had their chance to make their case, but they didn't take part. NOW, they are all running around and whining. Where were they for the last year?
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
 Subaru1-3-2-4Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT | I agree I never heard of it until now. |
|
|
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
TCH -Actually, they did. Internet Radio Stations did file objections.
You might want to ask the RIAA how that payola scheme went for record labels. I know the NY AG wasn't impressed. I think there were a lot of fines. I know some people were fired at radio stations over it. |
|
| said by kyramilan:TCH -Actually, they did. Internet Radio Stations did file objections. Then where is their filings at the Royalty Board web site?
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
 sirwoogieBlahPremium
join:2002-01-02
Carleton, MI | reply to fAcEtIOUs
quote:
A question I have is where were all these music streaming groups with their comments on the hearings that have been ongoing thru 2006? They had their chance to make their case, but they didn't take part. NOW, they are all running around and whining. Where were they for the last year?
As stated in the various blogs and posts (omitted on BBR story post), the webcasters were present via their representative organizations (e.g. International Webcasting Association (»www.webcasters.org/), etc.). The recommendations and arguments made by those organizations were ignored.
Another good forum thread is over at RP:
»www.radioparadise.com/content.ph···&start=0
The blog post by Bill from RP has greater detail and links. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Actually, the RIAA and Webcast Radio Stations were negotiating and it broke down. The RIAA clearly wants them out of business because they used to pay a percentage of their revenue (a logical solution).
This is from RAIN:
"The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) has announced its decision on Internet radio royalty rates, rejecting all of the arguments made by Webcasters and instead adopting the "per play" rate proposal put forth by SoundExchange(a digital music fee collection body created by the RIAA)."
»www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/···ex.shtml
Why the arguments are not posted I don't know.
The funny part: Radio stations over the air are not affected since they are not streming. Now, that makes a lot of sense. Oh, wait, the RIAA's members own those mostly. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:... A question I have is where were all these music streaming groups with their comments on the hearings that have been ongoing thru 2006? They had their chance to make their case, but they didn't take part. NOW, they are all running around and whining. Where were they for the last year? what difference does it make whether they made comments and what they were? I doubt that any comments contrary to the recording industries' desires were seriously considered or even considered at all.
This entire government is by the business, for the business and nothing but the business. Consumers and other "little people" aren't part of the equation. |
|
1 edit | said by nasadude:what difference does it make whether they made comments and what they were? I doubt that any comments contrary to the recording industries' desires were seriously considered or even considered at all. This entire government is by the business, for the business and nothing but the business. Consumers and other "little people" aren't part of the equation. The backgrounds of the 3 judges on the Royalty Board don't indicate a pro-business anti-consumer bias:
»www.loc.gov/crb/background/crb-judges.html
Mr. Sledge ... served twelve years on the Alabama State Council on the Arts, where he was chair for two years. Other arts jobs include service as a director on the regional Southern Arts Federation, representing Alabama, a director of the Alabama Symphony Orchestra and Alabama advocacy captain for Americans for the Arts.
Dr. Wisniewski ... has served as vice-chair of the certification and review committee and member of the governing board of Central Maryland Health Systems Agency; as a member of the Montgomery County Commission on Aging; as a member of 1999-2000 Governor’s Task Force on Regulatory Reform in the State of Maryland.
William J. Roberts has been appointed as a copyright royalty judge with expertise in copyright law. Mr. Roberts began his legal career in the Copyright Office in 1987. He was a Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel attorney for the entire twelve-year history of the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel. Mr. Roberts is currently an adjunct faculty member at the George Mason University School of Law where he teaches copyright law. --
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude:said by fAcEtIOUs:... A question I have is where were all these music streaming groups with their comments on the hearings that have been ongoing thru 2006? They had their chance to make their case, but they didn't take part. NOW, they are all running around and whining. Where were they for the last year? what difference does it make whether they made comments and what they were? I doubt that any comments contrary to the recording industries' desires were seriously considered or even considered at all. This entire government is by the business, for the business and nothing but the business. Consumers and other "little people" aren't part of the equation. Exactly! |
|
sirwoogieBlahPremium
join:2002-01-02
Carleton, MI | reply to fAcEtIOUs
I don't disagree that their background seems to favor being on the webcasters side. Those judges being as educated in economics, copyright law and artistic areas I find it hard to believe they came to this conclusion.
Something else stinks here. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
|  |
|
 Dude111An Awesome DudePremium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:10 | reply to Subaru
Why dont they just NOT TELL ANYONE THEY ARE STREAMING??
The RIAA sucks pond water!!!!!! |
|
