Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Goes After Satellite Radio
nicholasjay writes "The RIAA is at it again. Now they don't like satellite radio. From the article 'The record industry ... believes the recording capability [of satellite radio receivers] is a clear copyright violation and could take revenue away from paid download music services.' This comes on the heels of both Sirius and XM announcing mp3 enabled players and the ability to record music heard on the radio. Also from the article: 'RIAA may seek $1 billion plus in music rights fees for a new contract covering 2007 to 2012 to replace the current $80 million pact that expires in 2006.'"
Radio NEVER has had to pay RIAA. Radio broadcasts were deemed "public performance" and had to pay their licenses to BMI/ASCAP/SESAC (the performance royalty companies). In fact, all these royalties RIAA has demanded from satellite radio, web radio, etc. Are completely new previously unheard of royalties. And it's all based on "caching".
For instance, you play music over the web. Your PC "buffers" the stream. RIAA made a case saying the buffering is a recording and therefore they need to be paid.
- The Saj
What is the difference between taping a song off the radio and creating an Mp3 from radio? Please, someone tell me because I am confused.
I would like someone from the RIAA to address why they need to go this route.
You can buy a CD, copy it, rip it and give it away...is this a violation too? Or can you only give it to someone who already owns it? (doesn't make sense)
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
What makes you think the record industry didn't try to villainize tape when it first came out?
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Audio Home Recording Act: This 1992 legislation exempts consumers from lawsuits for copyright violations when they record music for private, noncommercial use and eases access to advanced digital audio recording technologies. The law also provides for the payment of modest royalties to music creators and copyright owners, and mandates the inclusion of the Serial Copying Management Systems in all consumer digital audio recorders to limit multi-generational audio copying (i.e., making copies of copies). This legislation will also apply to all future digital recording technologies, so Congress will not be forced to revisit the issue as each new product becomes available.
Don't most radio stations have agreements with the various record labels? I seem to remember someone taking care of that paperwork...
Not for the rights to play the music over the air, that is through ASCAP and BMI. Maybe there was some paperwork to arrange to get the promotional copies of the records from the record companies, the but broadcast rights are through ASCAP/BMI.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
In this case the right being not a written law, but rather case law. While I don't see any judge wanting to overturn the Betamax decision, it can be done (far easier than if it was a law passed by congress). Once Betamax is voided all hell breaks loose.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
"Analog radio is of lesser quality, "
It is not.
Perhaps it is within possibility that if the satellite providers used a significant amount of bandwidth for a channel, and the analog station compressed the hell out of the FM station, then it might be better, but the reality is that good FM (i.e. WGMS out of Washington DC, or lots of other PBS stations) blows away any satellite service.
On the Sirius service, voice channels sound about the same or worse as shortwave broadcasts; the bit rates are so low that it takes you a couple weeks to get used to the sound. The music is okay, but clearly like low-grade FM; things like Saxophones are rendered so poorly on Sirius that you can barely tell that's what they are. Certain stations (i.e. Classical) are obviously given a higher bandwidth.
But stuff like NPR is better via FM because there is a lot less compression.
The advantages satellite has over terrestrial radio is country-wide access and no commercials. Sound quality is average at best.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Why is this modded so high? It may be interesting, but it certainly isn't correct.
v ._Grokster%2C_Ltd.
Grokster wasn't rulled illegal - the judges never made a ruling on that. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Studios%2C_Inc._
"None of the opinions said definitely whether or not Grokster did induce infringement or whether Grokster was liable."
...and you've eaten your pen. simply stunning.
I think other people have covered your licensing fees statement.
Satellite is NOT the same as analog, you're right. It's of lesser quality than the capability of analog signals. Whether or not your favorite Tejano Rap station broadcasts at full strength is up to them, but FM has a far superior fidelity to XM or Sirius. 2600 had an article on this from last year.
Both companies are using a single broadcast signal to project all 100+ of those channels into your radio. Those channels are highly compressed. It's not as though the reciever sends a signal up to the master satellite requesting the "moldy oldies" station and then your radio gets a full on signal. Nope, not at all. You get all the quality it'll deliver all at once for all stations (pay channels included) Don't be fooled into thinking that just because it's satellite it's better.
The RIAA can't target ASCAP/BMI. Harrassing ASCAP would directly impact the artists and their royalties. RIAA is OK with irritating the middle men, but doesn't want to go after the artists.
Find coupons in Greeley
Interesting discussion of Intellectual Property & etc. And my sense of the discussion was that the (former jefe of) MPAA's resembled the effect of talking to a Television Set.
I only wish Hunter Thompson had moderated.Verizon: Latin for "poor rural service".