Slashdot Mirror
MP3.com, Warner Music Reach Settlement
Roger writes: "The New York Times is reporting that MP3.com and Warner Music have reached a settlement, after a few weeks of rumors that a settlement with the RIAA was near. My.mp3.com should come back soon. NYT; free registration required."
Call me naive, but for some reason up until now I was actually buying the bullshit they were feeding me. I actually thought they were going after my.mp3.com because it broke copyright and facilitated piracy. I had my doubts once I'd gone and tried it out myself. Now it makes perfect sense that the more cynical (hell, smart) have been screaming the word money. They don't care about this stuff being done online. They care that they're not making enormous amounts of money on it.
Yet...
Yeah, we all know about it by now, EXCEPT THE PEOPLE POSTING THE STORIES, but a link is easier to use... :)
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
http://new s.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2045350.html?tag=st.ne. 1002.thed.ni
That one is more detailed.
We've seen something like this before: "Lyrics.ch and NMPA reach agreement"
lyrics.ch used to be the end-all database of lyrics on the net that seemed to contain just about anything you could think of (or at least anything I cared about). It got shut down by the National Music Publisher's Association, then was allowed back up after the NMPA and the site owner reached an "agreement".
It's been shadow of its former self ever since. Look up anything less than a top 40 hit and you're likely to find that your request "is not available at this time", but you will be supplied with links to at least 3 different sites that will be more than willing to sell you the corresponding album.
This is not the same situation, but will the new industry-approved version of mp3.com's hosting be better in any way? To compare quotes:
"[the NMPA's strategy is to offer a] web site to benefit both consumers and the industry, and to develop copyright-licensing policies that will still be effective in a world where consumers can get new recordings through digital downloads"
NYTimes on lyrics.ch (Feb '99)
"The "Big Five" record companies...are tenuously trying to embrace the digital delivery of their coveted music libraries, but through terms that ensure copyright protection of their signed works."
CNET regarding mp3.com
"Last Friday, the Switzerland-based operators of the Web site met with NMPA officials to discuss a proposal that would bring the Internet resource back online as an authorized commercial venture... [NMPA CEO Jack] Murphy acknowledged that he was willing to consider a revenue-sharing plan with the Lyrics Server."
NYT re lyrics.ch again
"Terms of the settlements and licensing agreements were not disclosed. However, the licensing terms could total about $11 million a year based on fees that record companies would charge on a per-play basis, according to one source familiar with the negotiations."
CNET on mp3.com again
My guess is that we won't see any sort of "pay for play" plan developed - just more links to online CD stores.
You heard it here first kids, the new trend called "merger via settlement".
This is how it works - The record companies get a well known portal for distribution, and the site owners avoid being constantly hit over the head record industry lawsuits.
Can't convince yourself that this is a merger wrapped in a settlement? Read the following quotes from the article and pretend you know nothing about the lawsuit:
"We look forward to working with WMG to expand its boundaries and are grateful to the entire WMG team for the insight and trust they've demonstrated and for making this opportunity possible."
and
"The licensing agreements will allow consumers to store copies of Warner Music Group or BMG compact discs they already own with MP3.com. The record companies will share an undisclosed amount of money received in the settlements with its artists. "
Sounds like a merger to me...
Over the course of the next year we'll begin to see the "lion laying down with the lamb" as both parties figure out that cooperation is more profitable than compitition.
Now look at them lawyers, that's the way you do it
.configs
:)
You sue the whole net over the MP3
That ain't workin' that's the way you do it
Music for nothin' and tunes for free
No, that ain't legal, that's the way they do it
Lemme tell ya them geeks ain't dumb
Hit the Napster site to get a whole album
Leach a few tracks using Gnutella
We gotta block all MP3.COM traffic
Custom firewall
We gotta do it in the name of bandwidth
We gotta stop those MP3s
See that CEO with the torn jeans and the T-shirt
No buddy, he's no MBA
That little punk kid has a million dollar web-site
That little punk kid just went IPO
I shouldda learned to hack the TCP/IP stack
I shouldda learned to rip CDs
Look at Lars Ulrich, man! He's flipping off the camera
Ugh! Metallica is losing fans fast
Hey, who's there? What's that? Downloading noises?
Filling up the next Gig cause the music's free
That ain't legal? That's the way they do it
Get their music for nothin' and your tunes for free
No, that aint' buying, that's the way we do it
We listen to all our music as an MP3
It's not stealing, it's the new way to do it
Music for nothing and your tunes for free
Music for nothing, tunes for free
Music for nothing, tunes for free
Apologies to Dire Straits.
Full rights to reproduce granted exclusively to Weird Al Yankovic.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
That's just wrong. When mp3.com first went ahead and bought and ripped and stored 40,000 CD's (at the time), they refused the Big 5's request to pay up! The big 5 wanted royalties on each play of each song. (And wouldn't that add up quick! - I Bet it wouldn't be a free service!)
Mp3.com thought it was rediculous to pay-per-play fees that the radio stations must do. They contended that this was JUST a way for users to listen to their music any way that they want. (anywhere any time). If they can play their music in their car via tape/CD, or listen at work on CD-ROM drives, why not simply allow them to play their music at any computer.
The problem though, is that Mp3.com (through advertising) would be benefiting financially by providing this service. And the problem is, the Big 5 believe that ONLY they should benefit from music copyrights. And since they own the copyright, there's not much you can do unless you get permission. (ala Radio station fees, and now mp3.com's new fees)
It's too bad. I fully agree that mp3.com had many great points. (I read Michael's messages and the message boards that followed since it all started) But when this came out, you could just tell that this time, they didn't have a legal leg to stand on. (Hard to do, when even the artists are slowly losing more rights to their own music to the big 5!!)
Rader
--- Out of Hard drive space again. 114GB of Mp3's.