Slashdot Mirror
Senate Passes Music Modernization Act With Unanimous Support (billboard.com)
After the House's unilateral support back in April, the Senate has unanimously voted to pass the Orrin G. Hatch Music Modernization Act, which is named in honor of the Republican senior senator from Utah -- a songwriter himself -- who will retire at the end of the year. Billboard explains the bill: The bill creates a blanket mechanical license and establishes a collective to administer it; reshapes how courts can determine rates, while making sure future performance rates hearings between performance rights organizations BMI and ASCAP and licensees rotate among all U.S. Southern District Court of New York Judges, instead of being assigned to the same two judges, Judge Denise Cote for ASCAP and Judge Louis Stanton for BMI, as its done now; creates a royalty for labels, artists and musicians to be paid by digital services for master recordings created prior to Feb. 15, 1972, while also eliminating a Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 carve out for "pre-existing digital services" like Sirius XM and Music Choice that allows for certain additional considerations not given to any other digital service when rates are set; and codifies a process for Sound Exchange to pay producers and engineers royalties for records on which they have worked.
Over on the music publishing side of the business, there was much happiness too. For example, ASCAP noted that the legislation reforms an "outdated music licensing system and give music creators an opportunity to obtain compensation that more accurately reflects the value of music in a free market." Billboard notes that the revised Senate version "will go back to the House where it needs approval due to all the changes made to the bill in order to get it passed in the Senate." Once the House approves, it will then head to President Trump's desk.
Over on the music publishing side of the business, there was much happiness too. For example, ASCAP noted that the legislation reforms an "outdated music licensing system and give music creators an opportunity to obtain compensation that more accurately reflects the value of music in a free market." Billboard notes that the revised Senate version "will go back to the House where it needs approval due to all the changes made to the bill in order to get it passed in the Senate." Once the House approves, it will then head to President Trump's desk.
Reading the article it sounds like streaming services are going to have to pay more to stream songs written before 72 in particular and more for everything in general. The article though is notably lacking in details, and keeps falling back to vague platitudes like
The result is a bill that moves us toward a modern music licensing landscape better founded on fair market rates and fair pay for all. At long last, a brighter tomorrow for both past and future generations of music creators is nearly upon us.”
I guess it's also nice for MOM and APPLE PIE.
Anything that passes with unanimous support is generally about as good for the public as the DMCA and the PATRIOT ACT. Hey, guess who introduced the Sonny Bono Copyright Act to Congress (wherein it passed through the Senate unanimously)? It was Orrin Hatch...
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
If you actually read the text of the bill, you will find they made wire tapping illegal without seeking copyright permissions from the person being recorded and they can charge a royalty but it would depend whether their life is a dramatic work or not, apparently.
The other weird thing, it gives absolutely no recognition of the public domain, so public domain works can be taken out by a similar new work. Fair use has also been specifically limited to legally recognised libraries, archives and educational institutions. The individual is not entitled to fair use and can have their public domain work stolen by a similar work by a pigopolists. You can rerecord a public domain work and deny the original public domain with new copyright.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
144 years ... copyright laws are so out of whack here in US, my only hope is that other countries will shift to more rational laws we'd all be able to take advantage of services based elsewhere in the world.
"I would suppose that if you are worth wiretapping, your life is either dramatic or is about to become so."
For the common joe, this doesn't matter too much for him. However consider now if you wiretap a cop, in addition to getting harrassed and brought downtown on bogus charges, you'll get a potential day in court or at the very least a stiff copyright fee.
But consider that this is the kind of thing that a politician would want the most given the lives they choose to lead.
Because Disney rains Washington with gold and silver whenever any of Mickey's copyright's are about to expire.
"His name was James Damore."
The other weird thing, it gives absolutely no recognition of the public domain, so public domain works can be taken out by a similar new work.
Cite?
Fair use has also been specifically limited to legally recognised libraries, archives and educational institutions.
I don't see that. I see the section about pre-1972 works (section 1401) that describes Fair Use for these works, and it only mentions libraries, etc., but references section 107 which defines Fair Use, and which the bill does not modify. Since it doesn't change sec. 107, I don't think it changes the scope of Fair Use.
On both points, if you were right I'd expect to see the ACLU and similar organizations complaining, but I don't.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Irrelevant. The copyright monopoly is not a natural thing. It is a deal to encourage the creation of works that are available to the public, and in return the public grants a monopoly on the creation of copies. If the culture of my life-time never enters the public domain during my life-time, then the limitation on copyright isn't an acceptable deal in return for granting the copyright monopoly.