Slashdot Mirror
Clear Channel Buys Patent For Instant Live CDs
An anonymous reader writes "According to this Rolling Stone article, and this article at P2P, everyone's favorite monopolist, Clear Channel, is bullying DiscLive and other companies in the available-after-the-concert live CD business by forbidding them from operating in their venues.
Looking at the actual Clear Channel patent itself, it's obvious that, unlike what is said by their Instant Live program head Steve Simon, their patent is very specific, and doesn't cover all media types and all onsite production, so isn't CC just standing behind a bogus patent to continue to act like a monopolist? Anyone have prior art to invalidate their patent?"
Anyone have prior art to invalidate their patent?
Back in 1988, I recorded a Pet Shop Boys concert on DAT, and got mugged outside the stadium. Does that count as instant distribution?
Anyone remember the Grateful Dead's policy on bootlegging, how they encouraged it and even gave a special area at the front of the stage for bootleggers to stand and get a decent recording?
Isn't this an instant recording of a live event? Hasn't this been going on for 20 years?
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
Check with any large church. They have been recording and releasing their services immediately afterwards, some on CD, some on tape, depending on the size of the church and the length of the sermon.
Some of us consider that a performance, and its been done on tape for over 30 years.
The idea is that your ticket to the event entitles you to "download" up to about 40 minutes worth of music (IIRC) from the event, using a "secure" DRM system.
My wife and I went last summer and I went to download my "fair share" of the music when I got home. Guess what? The music is in a proprietary format and you need a special client to be able to download and decode it. The client is only available as a Win32 .EXE
Sorry guys, I only have Solaris and Linux at home. I emailed and protested politely and was ignored. The client is called Wippit. I emailed them and got no reply, despite the fact that allegedly they welcomed feedback from non-Windows users asking for clients for other platforms.
Stick Men
In its current format, it is just being abused by big business to stifle innovation, and as a means to create an income though suing anyone any everyone who even remotely does something similar to what they have a patent on.
This is the only solution, and should be done as well as a complete re-write of the copyright laws, and civil lawsuit laws, as they too are now just a revenue stream for big business.
This is also fast becoming the case here in Australia too as Australia becomes America through the FTA (Free Trade Agreement).
Well that is my AU$0.02 (US$0.014178) worth.
Third of Nine
Well, um, yes.
Clear Channel Communications is a huge corp that owns hundreds of radio stations all over the country.
Ever since the FCC relaxed the regulations on how many stations a corp can own in a given market, CC has bought out most of their old competitors. IIRC, they own like 90% of the stations in some markets.
These are some of the people to blame when you complain about the "Top 40" and "Boy Bands" that make so much money. They're the ones that put them on the air, for whatever reason.
Are you just incredibly stupid, and/or do you work for the company?
---
(Cut from various sources)
The once small company has quickly grown to over 1200 stations, collecting approximately 20% of all radio advertising dollars and programming over 60% of all rock radio stations.
Clear Channel's largest competitor, Infinity/CBS, owns roughly 180 stations.
Within individual markets, such as Denver, Clear Channel controls every station broadcasting certain popular formats and their attendant desirable target audiences. In 2000, Clear Channel purchased SFX, Inc. (now renamed Clear Channel Entertainment), the largest concert promoter in the country.
By threatening vulnerable artists and labels with reduced or off-hours air play on the only stations likely to air their songs, Clear Channel pressures artists, labels and concert venues into sweetheart deals with its promotions arm.
Channel has directly retaliated against artists who spurn their services. In other cases Clear Channel is able to simply outbid local competitors and increase ticket prices for the consumers. In other instances in which local promoters are able to successfully outbid Clear Channel Entertainment for concerts, Clear Channel has refused to run advertisements for the shows or has aired them during undesirable time slots. This argument that Clear Channel is illegally tying its concert promotion business to its monopoly position in popular music radio underlies the Sherman Act proceeding currently underway in the District of Colorado, Nobody in Particular Presents v. Clear Channel Communications.
---
In economics, a monopoly (from the Greek monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service
Monopolies are characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide (and a lack of viable substitute goods), as well as high barriers to entry for potential competitors in the market.