Slashdot Mirror
ASCAP Wants To Be Paid When Your Phone Rings
gerddie notes a piece up on the EFF site outlining the fairly outlandish legal theories ASCAP is trying out in their court fight with AT&T. "ASCAP (the same folks who went after Girl Scouts for singing around a campfire) appears to believe that every time your musical ringtone rings in public, you're violating copyright law by 'publicly performing' it without a license. At least that's the import of a brief (PDF, 2.5 MB) it filed in ASCAP's court battle with mobile phone giant AT&T."
...needs a cup of tea and a lie down
No sig for the moment.
Even if ASCAP doesn't win, the RIAA will sue for your phone to see if you have any illegal downloaded ring tones.
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Does this mean if I have a radio with speakers in a public place I need to pay some kind of fee? I know that businesses which have radios that their customers can hear pay a license fee, but what about people, say, on the beach listening to a boom box? If they don't have to pay a fee, why should people with cell phones or their providers pay a public performance fee?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
. . . why these people have not been struck by a meteor. If there were a God in this universe, there would be a meteor.
Fine, you pricks. We'll stop providing you with free exposure for your shitty music. Happy now?
Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
--Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
Part of the problem is the doctrine that if something isn't actively and legally pursued and protected, you've given up your rights on it. This is what causes companies to send 'cease & desist' orders to fan websites and the like. That's what causes companies to sue the Girl-scouts.
The idea behind preventing public performance, and the like, is to prevent profiting from a public performance. There's no way that ASCAP can prove that someone's profiting from a cellphone ring-tone going off. They may be able to extract cash from clothing stores that play tunes while people shop, but this one is definitely going too far.
"I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"
Perhaps they should realize they already sold 'ringtone rights' and that the very term 'ringtone' denotes a public performance in their eyes..you can't tell someone they need x license to do y, but then say that x license is invalid for the purposes of y.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
This is good news right? Every time some greedy company or organization does something stupid like this in public, they take a (small) PR hit. At least, hopefully. They get away with it because it's not widely known yet, but I have the feeling people are starting to know more and more about this kind of thing going on.
Yet one more reason to avoid ringtones.
Not saying they are correct, just that I hate being forced to listen to someone's obnoxious music every time their phone rings.
Besides, even if it does count as a performance... doesn't selling a license to a song as a ringtone imply the right to use the ring tone without paying each time?
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
They gonna come after me when I've got my car stereo cranked and the windows down?
I know the people driving around me probably should, but is that really a "public performance?" A ringtone is no different than playing a stereo. It just goes off when you're not expecting it.
Copyright law needs a review across the board. By which I mean on an international level.
Here is my short list:
- Licences across borders has to be easier
- Software Patents should be revoked (in the US et al)
- Patents should be 70 years or 30 years after the creator's death
- Public performance should have "fair use" exclusions
- Heck, all copyright should have "fair use"
- Damages should be limited to value (e.g. 100% of damages, not 10,000%)
I'm sure there are other things. But frankly the copyright system as it stands is broken. When web-sites have to buy highly expensive licences in dozens of states and companies are winning millions for a few MP3s something is wrong.
The interest of the dealers, however, in any particular branch of trade or manufacture, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.
-Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
. . .if it means the end of musical ringtones.
Seriously who comes up with this idiotic nonsense. All that will happen is that consumers will spend less money on their music.
I'm an independent musician, and hate the RIAA, but ASCAP is more of a musician's union than anything else. They are one of the only groups that truly helps artists get paid for their work, in situations where money is already supposed to be set aside for the artists themselves. I have made a fair bit of cash in royalties from tracks that have appeared on networks like VH1 and A&E -- that is money that would have never been reported to me otherwise. If some network wants to use my track in some show, and generate advertising money off of it, then I think the artist deserves their rightful share. FYI: I am not signed to a major label, and I don't have the resources or connections that those acts have. They also help in situations such as radio reporting in places where I don't even speak the language -- as one example, they discovered my music playing on a commercial radio station in eastern Poland, and were able to retrive the royalties I had earned.
So, please don't instinctively tar them with the same brush as the idiots at the RIAA. I don't agree with everything ASCAP does, but in general they are a positive force for trying to help the actual creators of content, not the big labels and corporations.
This has got to be the dumbest thing I've heard.
Next, they will sue any device capable of making sounds in public. Phones are just the beginning, how about iPods, car makers, "boom box" (portable stereo system) makers. While I'd love it if the guys blasting their audio in their car would stop the noise pollution when I'm in their vacinity, I don't think suing them for publicly performing a copywritten work will effect change... And I don't think AT&T is to blame here.
Copyright is a temporary monopoly given to content creators on their works so that they can earn money without being ripped off. It is not intended to be used to stranglehold any company making a device which can play a sound to pay an extortion fee to a group representing content creators.
OH HO! But even that ringing may one day be construed as a public performance. Don't think they won't go there. As it is not a mechanical function of the phone's internal workings, the simulated ringing can be considered a performance, just like any ringtone!
Theoretically, if I purchase a song from Apple, and then I would like to make that into a ringtone, I have to pay Apple for that right. Where does that money go? I assumed that they were paying a portion of it to a third party for different playing rights.
The issue is moot, of course, since http://www.iringer.net/ is free, which makes my ringtones the same.
Even if ASCAP doesn't win, the RIAA will sue for your phone to see if you have any illegal downloaded ring tones.
Well, I think the case begs an interesting question: If this isn't a public performance, then why not? Which exception governs it?
I'm not an IP law student or lawyer, but I don't see an exception that governs this case. I'd imagine that determining when and how to bill when your phone rings in a situation that's sufficiently public would be nightmarish, but it seems like their case passes the laugh test.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I once fell down the stairs and the next day I recieved a bill from ASCAP and RIAA for performing a Lars Ulrich drum solo ... ok, maybe I do mean to be ridiculous.
Do we just let AT&T and ASCAP fight this one out? This is like Iran and North Korea going at it.
Eh I don't know if you can really blame them. If they can successfully sue then it's entirely the law's fault (or the judge for badly interpreting it). If they have no legal standing then the case will be dismissed or the judgment denied. What's everyone so angry about? Anyone can bring a case, no matter how outlandish.
We can get really mad at the RIAA for scaring people and ruining lives, but this group isn't suing teenagers. They're suing AT&T, with almost $300 billion in assets. Excuse me if I'm not terribly concerned about one of their legal teams having a little more work to do to fight off this frivolous lawsuit.
Initially I thought they were on crack. Then I realized what would happen if they actually won. Consider the implications for a minute or two and then see if you don't agree...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Out fo court settlement. Throw them a crumb just like one would with any other bugger.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
I'm pretty certain that the Framers didn't intend for your ringtone to be covered by copyright -- seeing as there's no way it can be considered to promote the Progress of either Science or useful Arts...
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Would this apply even if your ringtone is an illegally downloaded MP3 (like with my, uh, friend's phone)? It's kind of Al Capone having to pay taxes on money he got from drug trafficking.
(Actually, strange as it may sound, in the US one is supposed to pay taxes on illegitimately acquired income)
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
I for one think this is a very clever approach to earning more money off of a single product in a purely capitalist society.
Bogus; but clever.
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
Someone had to compose that lil ditty. He wants his money.
Obligatory xkcd
I can't believe everybody wants to get rich without doing a thing... Really, this is just going insane!
There, fixed that for you.
If I were a plumber, and I installed a toilet, I don't get paid every time someone takes a dump. If I designed a toilet, ditto. If I own a patent on some new-fangled kind of super-toilet, ditto. So do other creative professions seem to think that they deserve to get paid every time their work gets used...?
If a ring tone counts as a public performance then does playing it so loud on your earphones that everyone sitting nearby can recognize the tune also count? If so could ASCAP come after them as well....please!
How about I write and record a song with a chorus of "Fuck you ASCAP, lamest member of the mafIAA". Then I'll cut out the chorus, make it available as a ringtone. People can download it, others can hear it and notify ASCAP. If they choose to pursue, we can waste a great deal of their time and money before I decide it's public domain. If they choose not to, they'll be pursuing selectively, disproving their standing as supporting any song writers.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
I always keep my phone on vibrate.
Take that ASCAP!
Just because the ringtone you are using may have been created by some computer guy playing with beeps rather than a professional musician, doesn't necessarily change whether it's covered by ASCAP or not.
Hell, if I was the engineer that came up with that tune, I'd be suing the telephone companies for just the basic ringtone fee so fast...
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Surely, for the sake of reason, "Public performance" constitutes use by a commercial body of some form? (e.g. shopping centres, radio stations etc.) Otherwise there are millions of possible scenarios (which are completely inane from a copyright/licensing POV) where it could inadvertently happen - loud music from someone's car, a person having their MP3 player music very loud and hence audible...
If the court / legal bodies "buy" this kind of thing as being a violation, it's going to open the floodgates for a whole new wave of stinking turd - the world is already paranoid about liability, this kind of stuff just pushes us to the brink of practically "denouncing" others for supposed 'public performance'. Crazy, completely crazy. This is a said day for the world :/
Sure, anyone has the right to their day in court. On the other hand, it is most certainly the fault of the law if the cost of failing in a malicious or frivolous lawsuit is so minor and the rewards of success are so great that there is every incentive to flood the system.
The system must protect itself if it is to fulfill its alleged role of protecting society. The moment corporations can DDoS the legal system for fun and profit is the moment the legal system stops protecting anyone.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Well, when the media stop pumping into everyone just how special they are, how rich they will become and how little they will have to do to get it all, people will wake up and smell the roses. Until the time that people realize that wealth and power generally come from hard work or extreme talent (or normally both) they will keep clutching at straws to try to take the easy road to achieve the same end result.
Blame the media who is playing right into the hands of lazy people.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
I did actually mean "raises an interesting question," but that's just too funny.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
(to be posted on NotN tomorrow, probably)
The American Super-Society of Composers and Performers has filed a brief in a lawsuit against AT&T arguing that its members deserve payment every time a mobile phone rings.
The owners of the musical compositions are already paid for each ringtone download, but this does not cover ASSCAP public performance royalties.
"The musicians and songwriters are the true creators of objective value in society," said ASSCAP spokesdroid Ayn Rand. "They deserve your support. How would civilisation survive without Crazy Frog or the Nokia Tune?
"To this end, we are bringing suits against those individuals who, having purchased RIAA-licensed ringtones, do not then silence them when in public. Statutory damages of $80,000 should have a salutary effect on our coffers and, of course, our public image."
Further lawsuits will then be brought against those who silence their mobile phones. "4'33' by John Cage is a copyrighted work. Without the money going to his estate, he may never write another measured piece of silence again."
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Eh I don't know if you can really blame them. If they can successfully sue then it's entirely the law's fault (or the judge for badly interpreting it)... Anyone can bring a case, no matter how outlandish.
I can't agree with that. If someone engages in frivolous lawsuits, that's a reflection on their principles. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's an appropriate thing to do. There are plenty of ways I can be a jerk without breaking the law, but I'm still a jerk.
A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
Lars Ulrich doesn't even know how to play the drums.
... every time a trunk rattling boom boom drives past my place ine the middle of the night waking me up.... ...for every time I am interrupted with some damn silly ringtone in a theater... ...for every time I hear a song that annoys me.....
My phone just rings. I know it sounds crazy, but some people (OK maybe just me) actually prefer their phones to ring like - well, phones. I don't want to hear the latest hit R&B jingle or other such shit. I want to know that my phone is ringing. And sometimes, when I feel wild, I'll change to a slightly different ring tone that sounds like a different phone. If people who are stupid enough to pay for musical ringtones get sued, I say thats just fine with me. I never liked the music that most people play as ringtones anyways. If they start getting fined and sued maybe those people will think twice before turning their phones into random top40 samplers. Now get off my lawn!
Programmer: an ingenious device that converts caffeine into code.
If the ASCAP were actually to win and they were able to charge every time a ringtone encumbered cellphone rang, everybody would quit using those annoying ringtones! I can't wait.
It sounds like they are suing because they think the providers should be paying them a fee, not the end user. At least that is what their website says about it.
Kick their asses.... Boy never thought I would be siding with big telcom. Just goes to show that the entertainment industry beats big oil and evil utilities when it comes to the biggest corporate douche olympics. A perfect 10 indeed.
SO if a ring tone is less than 30 seconds long doesn't that constitute fair use
no matter how good it is, it is human nature always wants to make things better
Can we just abolish intellectual monopoly already? (And all government-granted monopolies while we're at it?) I'm not seeing any baby in this bathwater.
Billy Brown rides on. Yolanda Green bypasses Gary White.
Just because the ringtone you are using may have been created by some computer guy playing with beeps rather than a professional musician, doesn't necessarily change whether it's covered by ASCAP or not.
That ringtone came with my phone. The company who made my phone already paid for it. If the person who made it wasn't working for the phone manufacturer, they have already signed away their rights to it to them.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
ASPCA Wants To Be Paid When Your Dog Rings.
As far as I'm concerned, someone should have to pay ever time a cell phone goes off in, say, the middle of a movie theater.
I couldn't care less who gets the money.
Actually, I settle for having them put down.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
...which doesn't really matter since the law they crafted frames
the whole thing in terms of promoting a public good rather than
allowing for some sort of virtual land grab.
Those that think that copyright was somehow not ready for
the digital age even in 1790 simply don't understand the point
of copyright.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
"they have already signed away their rights to it to them"
Did they?
It entirely depends on what exactly is written in the contracts between the various parties along the line (from the employee/employer to manufacturer/distributor to carrier/end-user), as well as any applicable laws where the phone was designed, manufactured and sold.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Eh I don't know if you can really blame them. If they can successfully sue then it's entirely the law's fault
Exploiting loopholes is surely something you can blame someone for. If a good lawyer sees a loophole, they should feel a desire to close it, not exploit it. I'm reminded of a law professor I had (BTW IANAL) who described a friend who mowed a two-foot strip of his neighbor's lawn a fraction of an inch lower than the neighbor until the neighbor stopped mowing it. Then he planted a tree in that same strip. After a few years, he sued to essentially steal the land from his neighbor because he had been improving it and maintaining it. The law was on his side. My law prof was telling the tale as an example of an unintended loophole, but he was laughing about it like it was the best practical joke ever.
Yeah, I think a solution to this is if you bring a suit against someone and lose, you pay court costs. Might keep some folks from filling, but would also deal a pretty handy blow to frivolity.
Yeah, that process is called "Amendment".
Remember, The Constitution grants the Federal Government its legitimate authority. If it's not delegated, it's not legitimate.
They thought good and hard when they wrote: "to Promote the progress of Science and the useful Arts".
No Doubt's "Bathwater" doesn't meet that criteria. I might entertain arguments for "Hella Good", but it's still gonna be a uphill climb.
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
We can get really mad at the RIAA for scaring people and ruining lives, but this group isn't suing teenagers. They're suing AT&T, with almost $300 billion in assets. Excuse me if I'm not terribly concerned about one of their legal teams having a little more work to do to fight off this frivolous lawsuit.
If it really goes anywhere, It would be a hell of a fight since both are goning to put up the best argument money can buy.
Notice not "the best argument that is based on facts or substantial evidence" or "the best argument." but "the best one money can buy"
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
You have 10 years to cash in on your ideas. You want to screw the whole world over in a fit of selfish "VIEW ME AS THE ARTIST I AM!" tantrum, enjoy your 10 years, but the government should not support you after a decade of your decadence.
The number of people who earn enough money through their patents to be considered decadent is quite small. Patents are supposed to protect people like you, who come up with a great idea, from companies like Microsoft who can steal it and cost-lead your product until you go out of business.
Also, you're living in some sort of fantasy land where you think that all projects can go from early prototypes to final polish release in 10 years. I've worked on projects where the earliest (patented protected) prototype is more than 10 years old, and it's worth hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars and your argument is (apparently) "tough shit you should have sold it sooner!"
The real problem with patency isn't that it protects the inventors monopoly. It's that it's possible to patent practically anything, including ideas. Patency should protect the method of creation, not a concept.
I thought you were allowed to play a certain length clip of a song, video, etc... without worrying about copy write. Since ring tones are only 15 seconds long, wouldn't that fall into that category?
Curious about Storage and Virtualization? Check out
I think it's less to do with this one case as it is to do with the fact that the ASCAP's litigation history makes the RIAA look like the EFF.
Their legal theories often sound as if they were created by a Bizzaro version of Jack Thompson, one who doesn't have a hard on about video games but instead simply wants to ensure anyone who makes noise in any way pays the ASCAP for it.
As the summary mentioned (but linked a horrible site for backup), these ARE the people who went after summer camps to force them to pay an annual fee under the assumption that the campers would be singing around campfires or while on hikes. They are also the folk who went after open mic nights, even when the event organizers indicated that only orginal songs would be sung.
I'm mad, regardless of who they targeted, because the ASCAP seems to play the "throw as much shit at the wall as possible and see what sticks" game. That's not how the legal system should work.
No..but that does give me another idea besides punching them really hard.
Not sure I can piss on demand tho.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
It would also discriminate against the poor by ensuring that only people with money can get justice in court. Should we make defendants pay for their public defender if they're convicted?
Don't have simulated ringing, use the vibration motor to hit some sort of bell that makes a ringing sound, it becomes a mechanical function again.
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
Talk to me about that kind of injustice when it's in a criminal case. Corporate law is necessarily extremely complex and only very experienced lawyers can navigate it.
Hell, if I was the engineer that came up with that tune, I'd be suing the telephone companies for just the basic ringtone fee so fast...
You would look like an a-hole and get so much hate for a quick buck? I thought that was a bad thing, then again it is a current business model that "works".
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
http://xkcd.com/479/ - "Tones"
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
So much ignorance in these comments. People really don't understand how ASCAP works, otherwise you'd realize it's not possible for ASCAP to collect money from people singing around a camp fire.
Ah yes, Mr. Smith has lot more-complex ideals about market economics than many of his supposed acolytes; doesn't hurt to send out reminders of this
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
How about not being jerks and letting the authors collect their fractions of pennies for the use of their compositions to amuse yourself, impress your friends or whatever satisfaction is derived (presumed to be something, since it was worth it to you to pay to put it on your phone) from having the recognizable ringtone in the first place. How about that for being edgy and cool?
Based on my reading of the article, they aren't threatening to sue individuals for "public performance". Rather, they are using this as a ploy to wrangle more fees out of the phone companies. Quotes like "you're violating copyright law by 'publicly performing' it without a license." are inaccurate. Afterall, if you look at the article, it's part of a court document involving AT&T - which shows who this is aimed at (i.e. not you, the consumer) I will say that it sounds greedy, but it sounds more like a legal maneuver to get paid more, rather than an attack on the consumer. But, congratulations to the EFF for getting everyone up in arms.
Honestly... who actually enjoys the sound of a ringing phone?
I would much rather hear a phone ring than hear it play a low-fidelity rendition of Britney's latest hit.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
AT&T doesn't own the rights to those ringtones. If anyone deserves money from the use in those songs, its Nokia etc.
If they jack the price up so no one can afford to have those damned annoying tunes on their phones that always seem to go off during meetings or at the movie house.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If ASCAP really believes that ringtones constitute a performance, then surely they won't mind standing between any decent rock band and their fans when the band comes out and only performs 16 bars of all their hit songs.
This topic has really taken me off-guard. For years I've followed Slashdot stories and I have been fairly strongly against the RIAA because they represent the interests of corporations, not artists. This is not the case with ASCAP. ASCAP is literally the only advocate for us composers and songwriters. Hollywood made sure in the early days that composers were not adequately compensated, and were basically studio in-house serfs. Unfortunately, now that composers work freelance and not for the studios, the pay scale has stayed the same. The only people negotiating for composers are ASCAP and BMI. Granted, these are not perfect organizations, but they're all we have to insure that the composer of that jingle which made the corporation $20 million is getting paid his/her share. And it is a tiny share, I assure you. For example, it is standard practice for the studios to own the copyright of music composed for their films or tv shows.
Frankly, I'm shocked at the responses on here. I've always thought of Slashdot as a community of at least reasonably educated and thoughtful, if humorous people. But here I see dozens of people blasting ASCAP as if it were the RIAA or some other entity representing the fat cats. ASCAP represents the composers/songwriters.
Now, should we be paid every time the phone rings? No. Should we be paid if someone buys a ringtone? Hell yes. Why should anyone be allowed to make money off of our compositions without compensating us?
And for any programmers out there who are blasting the idea of compensation to ASCAP for media created for devices which have an ever-increasing importance in people's lives, I take that as direct permission for me to bittorrent your software that you've been working on.
But it inhibits perfectly valid lawsuits, in which both sides honestly feel they are in the right and need to have a judge to make a decision between two legally valid yet contradictory positions (because the law isn't perfect).
Instead you should amend this to have the Bozo rule. That is, at the end of the suit, if the judge says "what a bunch of bozos", then those guys have to pay the legal fees of the winning side.
Why does the top Google for tap dance nine iron" come up with a reference to farting?
Ah, loose associations (to childhood jokes).
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
For the joy your friggin' phone is bringing to those around you when it goes off? ASCAP should be forced to set aside a fund to pay _US_.
PG Tips, white and sweet. Best cuppa in the universe!
[UID-HeinzIntel]
What about the representatives of Patty and Mildred Hill??? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0707430/quotes
[UID-HeinzIntel]
Though you may have to hunt around for the software to transcode mp3s into the DRM package your maker uses, it's generally fairly easy to make your own ringtones.
For example, right here on their own website, the DRM packager for sony ericsson phones: http://developer.sonyericsson.com/site/global/docstools/misc/p_misc.jsp
I can't believe why everybody wants to be rich without doing nothing... Really, this is just going insane!
It's only worth it if you get your chicks for free...
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
If the 'poor' person has a good case, they will win.
Unfortunately, such an ideal of justice does not always match reality.
You can't charge me a royalty when my phone rings, because it rings like a standard Bell telephone. No copyright on that, assholes!
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Good luck proving you're not guilty of infringement in court.
Today, unlike 20 years ago, everyone has access they need to sell an invention within a few days. Exposure is almost instant, and someone will do it better than you did in one year or less, anyway.
Inventions are different than creative works, but even then, with short terms of protection, there's the problem that any invention that will be bought will have to be valuable enough to the new owner that they can make more off of buying related patents in the near term than they could just waiting 10 years for the term to expire. A longer term makes greater investments possible. This isn't the only worthwhile consideration w/ respect to patent/copyright protection, and we've gotten to a bad place imagining that it is, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a worthwhile consideration.
Creative works... in order to really profit from them, you need time for them to reach a critical mass of popularity. Even though there are some artists who seemingly become famous inside of a year or two, it's a *lot* more common to take 5-10 years of work. Sometimes a *lifetime* isn't enough, though I don't think that means copyright should extend beyond it. The original terms of 14 years plus an additional 14 years if the author was still alive seem about right to me.
Tweet, tweet.
It would also discriminate against the poor by ensuring that only people with money can get justice in court.
As opposed to the status quo, in which the side with the most money generally wins?
Such harebrained ideas are only hatched because they're used to getting away with ludicrous claims and actually getting what they want.
Copyright claims have left the borders of sanity. Actually they lept over it by some margin. Copyright was about creating a balance between creators and consumers of content. It's anything but this today.
It's time to get back to sensible copyright. Either that or a battle will ensue that the rights holders cannot win. They depend on income from content consumers. Content consumers, otoh, can live well without the content.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
is that some type of ASSHAT?
THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
Suppose you play music in your car, and are in a traffic jam with windows rolled down.Do you have to pay royalty for public performance?
Ringing phone is the same thing. I don't think its going to stand up in court. Just because somebody can hear what you play does not mean its public performance.
However if you booked an auditorium, hooked your phone to the mic and let it ring, it would be public performance.
What next, if you play music in your house, and somebody passing by the window can hear it, you need to pay royalty?
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
I'd rather stop listening to any music ever than spend money on them again. Every time I think they can't be more douchetastic, they find a way.
As soon as it stops being another greedy profit factory, I'll start buying again. I'm not holding my breath.
Yea sure... Sounds great until you consider the practical implications.
If everyone including me has a ringtone sounding like a normal phone, then everytime someone's cell phone rings I have to check whether it's mine.
If everyone uses personalized ringtones ('shit music') then I will know right away whether it's my phone. (Unless someone happens to have the exact same tune selected which is damn rare...)
And no, using vibrate is not an answer. If I have anything else in my pocket, I usually never even notice the vibration.
the historically accepted meaning of "begs the question"
My impression was that is was meant to imply circular reasoning.
"God exists because the Bible say so. The bible is true because the content comes from God."
This case is because AT&T has been selling ringtones at extortionate prices under the premise that it covers a public performance license, but has never paid those licensing fees for all those ring tones.
So ASCAP should sue AT&T for making available the songs to everyone on the street?
Or maybe... let's see... From http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282008/business/ringtone_sales_fizzling_out_103910.htm
Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), an organization that collects royalties for song writers and publishers, is forecasting that overall ringtone sales in the US will fall 7 percent in 2008 to approximately $510 million.
Let's say it dropped to $480 million, and AT&T sold a fourth of that, i.e. $120 million. Let's say they charge $9.6 per ringtone. That's 12.5 million ring tones.
Under the Thomas-Rasset statutory damage precedent, AT&T should pay ASCAP $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion dollars).
I'm all for! ;)
I really hope they get their measure passed. Any incentive for people to abuse my ear less with this idiotic invention of "ringtone" is very welcome by me.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
This is like Iran and North Korea going at it.
Seeing how this is going to be a nuclear war, let's consider the collateral damages to neighboring countries.
When North Korea gets hit, that's going to affect South Korea, which means I might be unable to watch Starcraft on GomTV.
If Iran gets hit, that's going to affect Iraq. Let's see, what do they provide of value... Oil to Bush? Oh, that was way back when? Uhmm....
Yeah, I want my Starcraft. Go NK, Go Kim!
There are rules about barratry, or vexatious litigation in England and Wales. They are rarely invoked as denying someone access to the legal system is a fairly serious step, for obvious reasons.
[FUCK BETA]
That's not a loophole. It's a pretty well established principle of land law that if you maintain exclusive possession of a piece of land for a certain length of time, treating it as your property, you can then claim ownership. This is a good thing - it makes sure someone uses the land instead of letting it lie fallow. Still, the case you describe is rather cheeky.
[FUCK BETA]
begin collecting ring metrics so you can request audio ringtone royalties from our customers whom we routinely sell to advertisers. dont be surprised to see a professional services invoice for this custom solution from your friendly AT&T engineering and development team.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Anyone who is familiar with ASCAP but not a member is already aware of their ludicrous claims and tactics, and their ridiculous methods of making money. How much of a PR hit could they possibly take? This sounds like "more of the same" to me...
Palm trees and 8
Ok, I'm a bit bothered by how many responses here are going along the lines of "ASCAP are evil IP mongers who I'd normally want to fight against, but I personally don't like others' ringtones, so I don't mind so much".
HYPOCRITES!
If you don't like obnoxious ringtones (obnoxious is usually defined as 'stuff that isn't coming from your phone' of course), then fine, discuss noise pollution or novel technical means to battle them. Whatever... just don't be a hypocrite and decide that its ok to let the ASCAP be douchebags to someone else just because you happen to agree with the side-effects of their douchbaggery. If you do that, you're no better than the folks who claim to be pro-life, but then applaud the murder of a doctor who performs services they don't like.
Just for the record, I'm not saying this to be a troll. I seriously feel this way. Yes, I am often annoyed by others' obnoxious tones, but supporting the ASCAP or the **AA in this one instance would be really shortsighted and hypocritical.
The Digital Sorceress
so cellphone companies can charge for the ringtones but the composers can't?
One thing that worries me about this is the fact that ASCAP requires the entity paying for the public performance to collect data on what songs are played, and the number of times that they are played, so that the artists can be compensated in proportion to how often their songs are played (which does actually happen, believe it or not). This would mean that AT&T would be required to set up a system where every time an individual's phone rings the ringtone used on the phone would be reported back to AT&T. After all, how are they to know which of the 10 mangled song clips a user paid for are being used as a ringtone, or what if they're in a movie and actually set their phone on vibrate? And what about user created ringtones? Do they just assume that the filename accurately describes the song being played?
Of course there's also the fact that AT&T will need to raise prices to cover the added cost, and since the royalty is not a one-time fee users will need to pay a subscription cost for each ringtone. And if AT&T ends up with an arrangement where they are charged each time a phone rings, then users will need to pay something like $.01 every time their phone rings.
You are just an ASSHAT shill. Their actions are clearly completely retarded, and anyone who doesn't represent them will know that.
Clever signature text goes here.
You can blame them for being asshats. Everyone is so angry about their obvious BS, and trying to trample all over individual rights.
Clever signature text goes here.
There was a report referenced on slashdot a while ago where over 90% of the money for a work is collected in the first 5 years.
For all kinds of creative and technical work across the board? That's surprising enough that I have to remain skeptical, though I'd naturally be interested in seeing a cite for the study.
And 90% of all new business ventures fail. Should the government give them bailouts for the first 5 years to see if they can work?
The differences between control over an invention or creative work and a "bailout" are many and large enough that this is a pretty tenuous connection.
And stop that crap about how it takes so long to get published. You don't have copyright until it's published
This is actually false. You have copyright for something (in the US, at any rate) as soon as you've created it (and fixed the work in some medium of expression, IIRC). You don't even have to register it with the copyright office (unless you're going to seek statutory damages).
you have NDA's which are PERMANENT until rescinded
NDAs are pretty much orthogonal to copyright concerns, a work that's protected by one doesn't usually need to be protected by the other, and any concerns about one would therefore be unaddressed by a change in the other.
Tweet, tweet.
What about all those people with HUGE sound systems in their cars? The type that pump out so much bass that the entire frame of the car rattles as the car moves down the road, and the music can be heard hundreds of meters away. I guess the RIAA will be going after them too, if they haven't already, assuming the driver is playing CDs rather than public radio broadcasts which would be covered by royalties paid by the radio station.
Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
I guess I should be careful about singing songs to my kids in the car when we're traveling? My wife and I often sing songs from the Wiggles, or various Disney songs, Hannah Montana (my 3-year old daughter LOVES her), and the like to the kids to entertain them on long trips. If we sing too loudly, someone outside the car might hear us and report us!!
Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
I've often thought that someone should come up with a Public Domain "Happy Birthday" song to replace the covered-by-copyright one.
How about setting "Happy Birthday" to the Hallelujah chorus from Händel's Messiah?
Haaaaaappy birthday! Happy birthday! Happy birthday!
Haaaaaappy birthday! Happy birthday, to you!
In general, it is safe and legal to kill your children. -- POSIX Programmer's Guide