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."

27 of 461 comments (clear)

  1. Someone... by Abreu · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...needs a cup of tea and a lie down

    --
    No sig for the moment.
    1. Re:Someone... by severoon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Another word for "composer" is "handicrafter." Another word for "publisher" is "typesetter." So ASCAP should change their name from "American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers" to "American Society of Skilled Handicrafting, Authoring and Typesetting Specialists."

      Short form: ASSHATS.

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    2. Re:Someone... by spikedvodka · · Score: 4, Funny

      come on... it's
      "Tea, Earl Grey, Hot"

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    3. Re:Someone... by cashman73 · · Score: 5, Funny
      "Tea, Earl Grey, Hot"

      That line is the property of Paramount Pictures. Please remit settlement payment of $5,000, or hire legal representation.

    4. Re:Someone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I got an email from ASCAP on this, since I am a member...

      Whether you are someone that is just starting out, struggling to get your music heard or an accomplished music creator with an extensive catalogue, nothing we do is more important than advocating for your copyrights and the livelihood that they can provide. No other performing rights organization is advocating across such a comprehensive platform as ASCAP, from legislative efforts in Washington to copyright education in American schools. Additionally, we've brought a dozen legal actions with digital companies whose business models do not include fair payment for the use of your music.

      You may see or read accounts of our legal actions from those arguing to limit your potential income. Not surprisingly, they misstate our efforts on your behalf. When it comes to the wireless carriers and ASCAP, here are the facts:

              * ASCAP is in Federal Rate Court with the two largest U.S. wireless carriers. We are seeking to ensure that they pay you a share of the substantial revenue they derive from content using your music. This includes the delivery of full track songs, music videos, television content, ringtones and ringback tones.
              * All this content generates revenue for the carriers, whether sold a la carte or on a subscription fee basis or bundled with voice, data and messaging services.
              * With respect to ringtones, ASCAP seeks to license the wireless carriers' transmissions of your music. ASCAP is not seeking to charge consumers. In fact, ASCAP has been licensing wireless carriers and ringtone content providers since 2001. Now, the carriers want to avoid that payment.
              * Wireless carriers make billions of dollars in a variety of ways from ringtones including per tone charges and multiple additional charges surrounding the transmission of ringtones. These billions are more than sufficient to cover a reasonable payment to ASCAP members and to allow the carriers an ample profit margin.
              * Bottom line, we are striving to license those that make a business of transmitting your music. This holds true for any medium where businesses have been built on the back of your music, whether terrestrial broadcast, satellite, cable, Internet or wireless carriers providing audio and video content. To be completely clear, our approach has always been to license these businesses, not to charge listeners.

      As ASCAP approaches the mid-point of 2009, we are gratified that more people choose membership in ASCAP than any other American performing rights organization. Nearly 100 new members are elected every day bringing our total membership to 360,000. Unlike the other U.S. performing rights organizations, we are a membership organization. As such, we have an obligation to represent all members in the pursuit of fair compensation for the use of their music.

      It really skirts around what's actually in the briefing. Basically ASACP is claiming that because AT&T controls the distribution, use, and "performance" (by triggering the ringtone when a call comes in) that they are responsible for public performance royalties.

    5. Re:Someone... by malkir · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dear AC, I do not have any money so am sending you this drawing I did of a spider instead. I value the drawing at $5,000 so trust that this settles the matter. Warm regards.

    6. Re:Someone... by numbski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hey, they're simply (continuing) to live up to their name!

      When I was in college (went to a small christian college in IL), the students were doing a self-led 10pm worship that was nothing but singing. I was the only guy on campus that owned an accoustic bass guitar, so I was asked to play along with the other guitarists, and agreed. We basically sang whatever praise and worship songs people started singing, and the guitarists went along with it and ad-libbed.

      Well - about 2 weeks after we started this, the college got a letter from ASCAP demanding performance payments. I kid you not - someone on campus turned us in. For doing praise and worship in a private group. The girl scouts around a camp fire at least is a large enough organization that I can almost see it, but someone on campus was just feeling spiteful, and even after explaining the situation ASCAP would not back down and threaten to sue us if we continued.

      So we couldn't do it anymore. :(

      Absolute idiocy. If ever a group was aptly named, ASCAP has done themselves a service at least in that department.

      --

      Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  2. RIAA by arizwebfoot · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:RIAA by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the RIAA will sue for your phone to see if you have any illegal downloaded ring tones

      To the RIAA, I say fucking bring it. They can search my phone every way they want they won't find any illegal music on there. Some of us use our phones for - can you believe it - communication, rather than entertainment. Hell I'll save them the time, then can send me the money they'd pay their assmonkey lawyer and I'll send them my phone in exchange. Then I'll take that money and buy myself a newer phone and send them a thank-you card.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:RIAA by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Funny

      Some of us use our phones for - can you believe it - communication

      But at some point you probably sung Happy Birthday to your child over the phone. As an unauthorized public performance that allows the RIAA to sell your children into slavery. This is all covered by the brief filed in their case "RIAA vs. All of Humanity".

    3. Re:RIAA by geekboy642 · · Score: 5, Funny

      My phone has 5 megapixel camera, opera mini as browser and full Java support. And it's not a high end phone. ... SSH to my computer ...

      My phone has none of that. Stupid cheap plastic junk. It does, however, have dozens of probably infringing ringtones. My favorite is a redub of Aerosmith's "Eat the Rich" that goes "Fuck the RIAA". The meter doesn't quite scan, but the point gets across.

      --
      Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
    4. Re:RIAA by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've often thought that someone should come up with a Public Domain "Happy Birthday" song to replace the covered-by-copyright one. Since "Good Morning To You" (the song that Happy Birthday is based off of) is in Public Domain and is only 1 note away from Happy Birthday, we could base it off of "Good Morning To You." Of course, there would be more of a chance of the RIAA opening a torrent search site than of the new Happy Birthday song catching on.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  3. What about radios, etc? by BitterOak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?
    1. Re:What about radios, etc? by mr_matticus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it does.

      No, it doesn't.

      From 17 USC 110(5):
      [The following is not an infringement:] except as provided in subparagraph (B), communication of a transmission embodying a performance or display of a work by the public reception of the transmission on a single receiving apparatus of a kind commonly used in private homes, unless--
      (i) a direct charge is made to see or hear the transmission; or
      (ii) the transmission thus received is further transmitted to the public;

      Their situation is no different. The law doesn't distinguish between a business playing the radio and any other person playing the radio

      Sure it does, beyond a certain point. At the low end of the spectrum, there's no need to make such a distinction, because all parties are exempt who follow the rules.

      Once again, faulty and idiotic legal interpretations from the ignorant.

      ASCAP just wants money from the carrier's commercial ringtone sales. It's got nothing to do with anything else.

    2. Re:What about radios, etc? by mr_matticus · · Score: 5, Informative

      In the hypothetical boom-box situation then the music is being further transmitted (as sounds waves in the air) to the public. Ergo,

      No. Further transmission is retransmission, as defined in section 101 and clarified in the committee notes. "Sound waves" in the air are not transmissions; a loudspeaker is not a transmitter.

      This is further clarified by Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists, 392 U.S. 390, and Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151.

      Please stop with the outlandish displays of ignorance.

    3. Re:What about radios, etc? by mr_matticus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Offtopic and a little trollish: This lack of distinction at the low end actually got the U.S. in a bit of trouble at the WTO

      No, not strictly true. If you read the WTO decision, 110(5)(A), the section I quoted, was upheld as a valid exception to the Berne/TRIPS Art. 11 rights.

      110(5)(B), which is the more complex exception passed by the small business lobby and the expanded codification of the Aiken rule, was the portion that the US lost. This is all found in the WTO Panel Report, DS/160/R.

      Rather than changing the law (which Congress doesn't want to do), the United States agreed to make a lump-sum payment

      No, the terms of the settlement do indeed require the United States to change its domestic law to comply with its international obligations. The US to date has not done so.

      Maybe it is because the small business owners ask more nicely.

      It's because the small business lobby isn't deluded and scattered into shooting themselves in the foot left and right. The progressive copyright lobby groups exist, but they do not support complete abolition, and Slashdot's membership does its very best to torpedo every proposed change and submitted bill for reform, including proposals for personal use exemptions, revised statutory damages for P2P infringements, and statutory codification of LOC exemptions. In that respect, the RIAA/MPAA and Slashdot are a united front.

    4. Re:What about radios, etc? by mr_matticus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All right, then why are businesses hounded for playing the radio for their customers?

      Which businesses? "Hounded" in what way? By whom? Where have they been denied their exemption under the law?

      This kind of synthesized proposition is meaningless because the question and the response will inevitably be about different things. You're referring, I assume, to anecdotal reports of over-aggressive conduct by collection societies. That's par for the course in the business world, end to end, whether copyright is involved or not.

      If we're ignorant, then how about enlightening us instead of just calling names?

      How about not making statements you have no authority to make, and presenting them as fact? How about not asserting challenges alleging an "inconsistency" without possession of the requisite knowledge to establish it? Pose responses in the form of a question if you don't know what you're talking about.

      Making it look like your arguments are factual and supported by reality when they are not is simply ignorant.

      The assertion that a loudspeaker is a transmitter is expressly rejected by law and practice. Moreover, it would give the entire statutory section a scope of exactly zero. There is no other word than "ignorant" to describe a person making such a flatly fallacious assertion. Stumbling over oneself to issue a correction or an argumentative challenge, when the information they pose is both incorrect and nonsensical, is a disservice to knowledge. You want enlightenment? Learn to seek it constructively.

      If you consider being called ignorant when you make such a grand display of it to be "being called a name", that's your issue, but coming from someone whose discourse regularly includes the word 'fucking', I place little weight on comments of tone and etiquette. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge. It can only be an insult to someone who purports to have that knowledge in the first place, when it is clear s/he does not.

  4. One cannot help but wonder . . . by taustin · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . why these people have not been struck by a meteor. If there were a God in this universe, there would be a meteor.

  5. Obligatory by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  6. Hold on, ASCAP != RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  7. I don't mean to be ridiculous but ... by electricprof · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  8. Pick you battles by newgalactic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do we just let AT&T and ASCAP fight this one out? This is like Iran and North Korea going at it.

  9. They're Absolutely Right! by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

    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?

  10. Re:Copyright law... by CorporateSuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    -Patents should be 70 years or 30 years after the creator's death

    How about not? Make them 10 years. 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. This isn't the industrial revolution or some atomic age. This is the information age where ideas are a dime a million. 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.

    --
    I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
  11. The silver lining? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!

  12. Re:I recommend they come ask me in person. by jd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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)
  13. Re:Begs an interesting question. by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's a tricky issue. That said, ASCAP's position in this case seems to be utter crap in a lot of ways. For example, they claim that ringtones are streaming because like streaming, "AT&T maintains a continuous connection to your phone." Of course, none of the audio data is sent through that connection, which makes it decidedly not streaming. They're trying to twist this after having their backsides handed to them in another case in which music downloads were declared to not be a public performance.

    However, this case is not really about whether ringtones are a public performance. 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. They've been pocketing the extra money above and beyond the usual cost of a digital music download. If you ever needed proof that AT&T are a bunch of leaches, you now have it. In order to bring this case to court, though, ASCAP has to get the courts to agree that AT&T triggering music that they explicitly sold as a ringtone constitutes a public performance by AT&T. That's a very tricky legal issue. They're right that it isn't the same as a download the moment AT&T triggers it. AT&T is also right that it isn't streaming.

    Ultimately, I suspect the courts will rule that it is public performance, but that it is public performance by an individual, at which point ASCAP will likely drop the issue. However, that will also open up AT&T to lawsuits by consumers who have been fraudulently overcharged for ringtones under the false belief that they were licensing the right to its use in a public performance. Either way, AT&T is potentially screwed because they didn't pay those fees. If, however, the courts rule that triggering the performance of a musical work constitutes public performance, then AT&T is screwed solely because they sold the music that was being used as a ringtone. In that case, AT&T would be legally better off opening up the phones for users to put in any arbitrary audio file as a ringtone. That way, at least in theory, they cease to be culpable.

    Either way the decision goes, there's next to no chance that this will impact the consumer in any significantly negative way, and a decision against AT&T might actually encourage them to open up their phones more. This is strictly a lawsuit filed by ASCAP against AT&T for breaching contracts by selling ringtones and then pocketing the licensing fees. Nothing to see here. Move along.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.