I already pay royalties to BMI, ASCAP and SESAC. Why do I have to pay royalties to SoundExchange also?
Every musical recording embodies two distinct copyrighted works. The first is the underlying musical composition, comprised of the written notes and lyrics (for purposes of copyright law, the musical composition is referred to as a "musical work"). The songwriter and/or his or her music publisher usually own the copyright in the musical work. The second copyrighted work is the actual recording itself - the sounds, including the recording artist's interpretation of the musical composition, and the creative efforts of the producer, sound engineers and background musicians. (This is referred to in copyright law as a "sound recording.") The copyrighted recording brings to life the written notes and lyrics of the musical work. A record label typically owns the copyright in the sound recording.
SoundExchange collects and distributes royalties associated with the public performance of sound recordings made by services operating under one of the compulsory licenses. By contrast, ASCAP, BMI and SESAC collect and distribute royalties associated with the public performance of musical works.
You can go to each band whose music you want to play and make a deal with them directly. Obviously unless you are only playing a few artists(who would return your call) it would be quite impractical to be calling 100s of artists and flying over to wherever the hell they are(don't forget your lawyer) and make and sign contracts. This is where SoundExchange comes in and 'frees' you of that burden.
Contrary to what GP states, MANY if not MOST of the internet stations out there operate through this statutory license(if they license at all). I do agree though that they should be paying broadcasters like they do with terrestrial radio. But terrestrial radio stations have stringent requirements who plays when and how many times. Basically they run the show.
In 2002, he helped to sponsor a bill that would have given music and movie companies the right to disrupt peer-to-peer networks and even hack into the computers of suspected file-swappers... He has been a big supporter of broadcast flags and was also behind legislation that directed the FBI to produce a special FBI warning, complete with seal that could be sent to suspected copyright violators... But his total take from entertainment companies has actually decreased in recent years. In the 2002 cycle, he was the number two recipient of entertainment industry contributions. In 2006, he fell to eighth, though he was still the number one recipient in the House (apparently, donating to Senators is now the way to get things done).
Most of the patents are plain useless as any sort of way to encourage and disseminate knowledge which is the plain purpose of them(constitutionally at least, who the hell reads that thing these days?) That is the single most important failing of the patent system that is evident in all others. Maybe my cynicism is showing, but with their recent try at reform, that failing will be buried under even more red tape. I'm guessing that soon, red tape will be our only invention worthy of export.
It was originally developed by the U.S. Navy...(hint hint) But in the non-tinfoil hat land there are currently 2 weaknesses in Tor: DNS leaking and probabilistic traffic analysis. I can guess that the former was probably the source of his outing since I don't know of anybody that has used the latter to find an originator.
How long before some lobbyist convinces the government to make it mandatory to use an *AA approved protocol/operating system which can be used to ensure that their IP 'rights' aren't being violated??
Actually that is exactly what they tried with PERFORM Act. Greed knows no bounds.
That's why organizations like this exist. Just because you use it in your home project doesn't mean you will get your pants sued by everybody imaginable. Not every organization is like RIAA or MPAA. However, if you intend to use it in a commercial product you should seriously weigh the advantages of licensing as opposed to litigating. Here are some of MPEG LA's licensing terms:
Royalties to be paid by end product manufacturers for an encoder, a decoder or both ("unit") begin at US $0.20 per unit after the first 100,000 units each year. There are no royalties on the first 100,000 units each year. Above 5 million units per year, the royalty is US $0.10 per unit.
# Title-by-Title - For AVC video (either on physical media or ordered and paid for on title-by-title basis, e.g., PPV, VOD, or digital download, where viewer determines titles to be viewed or number of viewable titles are otherwise limited), there are no royalties up to 12 minutes in length. For AVC video greater than 12 minutes in length, royalties are the lower of (a) 2% of the price paid to the licensee from licensee's first arms length sale or (b) $0.02 per title. Categories of licensees include (i) replicators of physical media, and (ii) service/content providers (e.g., cable, satellite, video DSL, internet and mobile) of VOD, PPV and electronic downloads to end users.
# Subscription - For AVC video provided on a subscription basis (not ordered title-by-title), no royalties are payable by a system (satellite, internet, local mobile or local cable franchise) consisting of 100,000 or fewer subscribers in a year. For systems with greater than 100,000 AVC video subscribers, the annual participation fee is $25,000 per year up to 250,000 subscribers, $50,000 per year for greater than 250,000 AVC video subscribers up to 500,000 subscribers, $75,000 per year for greater than 500,000 AVC video subscribers up to 1,000,000 subscribers, and $100,000 per year for greater than 1,000,000 AVC video subscribers.
Not really unreasonable. Especially when you consider what kind of license terms are offered for content(aka RIAA or MPAA).
HDTV Ownership Annual Househole Income who Have an HDTV Under $30,000 - 6 percent $30,000 - $50,000 - 8 percent $50,000 - $75,000 - 17 percent $75,000 - $100,000 - 25 percent Over $100,000 - 38 percent
But besides price, there are many other problems with HD such as bandwidth, storage and drm. Reminds me of laserdisks--great toys for the affluent but not much advantage over VHS.
The fiercely competitive pricing came at a cost. Best Buy and Circuit City, the nation's two largest electronics retailers, both missed analyst expectations in their third-quarter earnings, reported in mid-December. Circuit City posted a sharp loss for the three months ending in November, which the retailer blamed on low HDTV pricing. Even so, the retailer said it had no plans to back off as it tried to gain market share.
The most recent amendment to criminal copyright infringement was the No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 (Net Act), which made it a felony to reproduce or distribute copies of copyrighted works electronically regardless of whether the defendant had a profit motive... A commercially motivated infringer can receive up to a five-year federal prison term and $250,000 in fines; a noncommercial willful infringer is subject to up to a one-year prison term and $100,000 in fines. The maximum prison term for repeat infringers is up to 10 years for commercially motivated ones and up to 6 years for noncommercial infringers.
(all emphasis mine) Best written article on copyright infringement bar none, and seems she's a professor at a university with more than a dozen books written on the subject. And also, if you feel like this is a white collar resort prison, I would hate to prove you wrong when you end up in the Federal pound-me-in-the-ass one.
I agree that it's an insult to include Tivo as a hackable platform. Tivo gave rise to the term Tivoization and Tivo is *the* main reason for GPLv3. In comparison, Neuros is a much better example of a hackable platform than Tivo.
Yes it does impose freedom. Before I launch into this, realize that we have a different definition of freedom as pertaining to software. Where you are concerned with the code itself, being able to do with it as one pleases, I'm more concerned about people that use it. I don't want people using it that just want to take it and give nothing in return. That's essentially what I meant by them "screwing you." I respect the spirit of the BSDL but it's a little naive.
If somebody can't be bothered to release a few patches as a thanks for letting them have a running start then I don't want them using my code. It's a way to share with the people who appreciate the gesture and hopefully they can give back, but it's more for the Tivos of the world who will just take it for granted. People are not forced to use my code. But if they want to use it, they have to respect the terms I offered. Freedom is "imposed" all around us. Open your eyes.
The One Laptop Per Child Project (OLPC) has whittled down the cost of the green and white computer they hope to deliver to school children in developing countries to about 100(euro) (US$130) so far, and hope to reach the target price of US$100 in 2008, a project leader said Monday.
Are you implying that due to the fact that the BSD operating system is licensed with the standard BSD license, that you can only write software that is BSD licensed?
It's more like you can write software that is BSD licensed but you can just take that software as a base without either paying the authors or contributing code back. Actually you can close it off and not let the actual original author modify and use it. See the article I linked in the original post.
Also I think you're confusing "desktop" as used in the article(?); he clearly uses desktop as a working OS not a windowing system. This goes back to the point I said: the reason people are "wedded to Linux" is *precisely* because of the license issues.
TCP has worked pretty well with "net neutrality." Applying it to UDP and realtime packets is somehow different, no? That's essentially what this whole debate is about. I'm surprised nobody on/. has delved into the specifics but rather hid behind blanket statements that government regulation is "bad" and market is "good." Nothing is stopping the big telecos from making their own internets(what there are others??) with their restrictive policies. Just don't be congesting taxpayer funded networks.
I'm glad someone mentioned BSD because with BSD a company can just take *your* hard work and say screw you. At least with Linux you have the GPL that legally forces people to be mutualistic. So now the answer to why the free-desktop developers are wedded to Linux: we got screwed before that's why. Come join us when you feel the sting.
The restrictions would be that everything you ever convert will be directly traceable to you. Would this be bad? Depends on what you're converting and how bad someone wants to find you. Of course real pirates would have a bogus key anyway. Maybe even yours.
Slashdot Mirror
You can go to each band whose music you want to play and make a deal with them directly. Obviously unless you are only playing a few artists(who would return your call) it would be quite impractical to be calling 100s of artists and flying over to wherever the hell they are(don't forget your lawyer) and make and sign contracts. This is where SoundExchange comes in and 'frees' you of that burden.
Contrary to what GP states, MANY if not MOST of the internet stations out there operate through this statutory license(if they license at all). I do agree though that they should be paying broadcasters like they do with terrestrial radio. But terrestrial radio stations have stringent requirements who plays when and how many times. Basically they run the show.
Al Gore replied with:
"During my service outside the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Inconvenient Facts."
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-862
Need I say more?
Most of the patents are plain useless as any sort of way to encourage and disseminate knowledge which is the plain purpose of them(constitutionally at least, who the hell reads that thing these days?) That is the single most important failing of the patent system that is evident in all others. Maybe my cynicism is showing, but with their recent try at reform, that failing will be buried under even more red tape. I'm guessing that soon, red tape will be our only invention worthy of export.
It was originally developed by the U.S. Navy...(hint hint) But in the non-tinfoil hat land there are currently 2 weaknesses in Tor: DNS leaking and probabilistic traffic analysis. I can guess that the former was probably the source of his outing since I don't know of anybody that has used the latter to find an originator.
Maybe the Sun has something to do with it?
Fortune has never been more appropriate: Perhaps too many hands got caught in snowblowers?
Google surely wouldn't censor it's maps on request by an interested party.
Oooh I can play that game
BRIBE:
Bringing Really Innocent Bills in Exchange Act
And they were cheating! Half the letters weren't used. And they used a whole word for 3 letters. Jeez no wonder they're in politics.
Ok before you get some chap stuck in jail:
(all emphasis mine)
Best written article on copyright infringement bar none, and seems she's a professor at a university with more than a dozen books written on the subject. And also, if you feel like this is a white collar resort prison, I would hate to prove you wrong when you end up in the Federal pound-me-in-the-ass one.
Then you must have something to hide!
I agree that it's an insult to include Tivo as a hackable platform. Tivo gave rise to the term Tivoization and Tivo is *the* main reason for GPLv3. In comparison, Neuros is a much better example of a hackable platform than Tivo.
Adblock Plus has a whitelist so you can support the sites you like while blocking all others.
Yes it does impose freedom. Before I launch into this, realize that we have a different definition of freedom as pertaining to software. Where you are concerned with the code itself, being able to do with it as one pleases, I'm more concerned about people that use it. I don't want people using it that just want to take it and give nothing in return. That's essentially what I meant by them "screwing you." I respect the spirit of the BSDL but it's a little naive.
If somebody can't be bothered to release a few patches as a thanks for letting them have a running start then I don't want them using my code. It's a way to share with the people who appreciate the gesture and hopefully they can give back, but it's more for the Tivos of the world who will just take it for granted. People are not forced to use my code. But if they want to use it, they have to respect the terms I offered. Freedom is "imposed" all around us. Open your eyes.
It's more like you can write software that is BSD licensed but you can just take that software as a base without either paying the authors or contributing code back. Actually you can close it off and not let the actual original author modify and use it. See the article I linked in the original post.
Also I think you're confusing "desktop" as used in the article(?); he clearly uses desktop as a working OS not a windowing system. This goes back to the point I said: the reason people are "wedded to Linux" is *precisely* because of the license issues.
TCP has worked pretty well with "net neutrality." Applying it to UDP and realtime packets is somehow different, no? That's essentially what this whole debate is about. I'm surprised nobody on /. has delved into the specifics but rather hid behind blanket statements that government regulation is "bad" and market is "good." Nothing is stopping the big telecos from making their own internets(what there are others??) with their restrictive policies. Just don't be congesting taxpayer funded networks.
I'm glad someone mentioned BSD because with BSD a company can just take *your* hard work and say screw you. At least with Linux you have the GPL that legally forces people to be mutualistic. So now the answer to why the free-desktop developers are wedded to Linux: we got screwed before that's why. Come join us when you feel the sting.
Wouldn't be the first time.
The restrictions would be that everything you ever convert will be directly traceable to you. Would this be bad? Depends on what you're converting and how bad someone wants to find you. Of course real pirates would have a bogus key anyway. Maybe even yours.