Go Back   Aural Moon - Progressive Rock Discussion > Prog Rock Discussion > General Discussion/Prog News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-11-2007, 04:47 PM
lotus's Avatar
lotus lotus is offline
Patron
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 794
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

This link could help to spread the movement against RIAA

http://www.savethestreams.org/
__________________
Lotus
****************************************
The light at the end of the tunnel is the light of an oncomming train......

Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-16-2007, 11:08 AM
PFD's Avatar
PFD PFD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 137
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Another relevant article, if you haven't seen it yet...

http://technology.canoe.ca/Internet/...034315-ap.html
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-16-2007, 12:32 PM
kirk's Avatar
kirk kirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NW Canadian border, Blaine Wa.
Posts: 468
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

The one ray of hope here, is that the really biggies,
such as Yahoo, Comcast, MSN has the means to go after
the ruling should they decide it's monetarily feasible.

Otherwise, i get the sensation of watching the favorite team
play on television w/ the fingers crossed.

P e a c e

K
__________________
Zenpool
at SongPlanet

www.cdbaby.com/zenpool
available at itunes, toweronline, bestbuyonline,
sony direct, rhapsody, loudeye...
IOMA award winner "best producer"2004
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-16-2007, 12:44 PM
VAXman's Avatar
VAXman(Admin) VAXman is offline
progger propellerhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Presently reside in Jackson (southern) NJ (20 miles east of NEARfest 2002 & 2003
Posts: 2,288
Send a message via AIM to VAXman Send a message via Skype™ to VAXman
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk View Post
The one ray of hope here, is that the really biggies,
such as Yahoo, Comcast, MSN has the means to go after
the ruling should they decide it's monetarily feasible.

Otherwise, i get the sensation of watching the favorite team
play on television w/ the fingers crossed.

P e a c e

K
Yahoo (A big...ger corp. in fact jumped about 100 in the fortune 500 just recently.), Comcast (A cable company? C'mon, they're one of the big offenders in the net-neutrality argument!) and M$N (Puhleez! M$, the criminal monopoly, is the kingpin here.) -- We're doomed! They will collude amongst themselves and coerce the RIAA/CRB to structure rates to their benefit and the detriment of the little guys like AM. This is, AFAIAC, all about content control. Yet another nail in the net-neutrality coffin.
__________________
VAXman -- Watcher of the moon, watcher of all.
----------------Mopper of the moon, mopper of all.
-------------------- Aural Moon's Janitorial Services
---------------------and Restroom Supplies, and Techno-patsy --

Cogito ergo iMac.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-16-2007, 12:45 PM
Rick and Roll's Avatar
Rick and Roll Rick and Roll is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baltimore suburbs
Posts: 5,086
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk View Post
The one ray of hope here, is that the really biggies,
such as Yahoo, Comcast, MSN has the means to go after
the ruling should they decide it's monetarily feasible.

Otherwise, i get the sensation of watching the favorite team
play on television w/ the fingers crossed.

P e a c e

K
Wonder if ringtones are covered
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-16-2007, 01:48 PM
kirk's Avatar
kirk kirk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NW Canadian border, Blaine Wa.
Posts: 468
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by VAXman View Post
Yahoo (A big...ger corp. in fact jumped about 100 in the fortune 500 just recently.), Comcast (A cable company? C'mon, they're one of the big offenders in the net-neutrality argument!) and M$N (Puhleez! M$, the criminal monopoly, is the kingpin here.) -- We're doomed! They will collude amongst themselves and coerce the RIAA/CRB to structure rates to their benefit and the detriment of the little guys like AM. This is, AFAIAC, all about content control. Yet another nail in the net-neutrality coffin.
"Besides a group of small webcasters, a coalition of Web companies
including Yahoo Inc. also objected, as did public and other radio stations
that would be covered by the new rates".


I know B, I named the profane ones in my post, but
MSN sells my stuff
I guess in all fairness, so does Itunes.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows, eh?
So, how far up the ladder do we have to go to find the pockets..?
We all know that justice would be charging on a profitabilty slider, but...
IMO- in this case, it takes a giant to slay a giant.

BTW- I'm predicting that the more draconian portions of the decision
will be used as a compromise, like "retroactive to Jan. 06.." .
If that's why they exist, it's evil, but very good stategy.


K
__________________
Zenpool
at SongPlanet

www.cdbaby.com/zenpool
available at itunes, toweronline, bestbuyonline,
sony direct, rhapsody, loudeye...
IOMA award winner "best producer"2004
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-16-2007, 02:59 PM
VAXman's Avatar
VAXman(Admin) VAXman is offline
progger propellerhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Presently reside in Jackson (southern) NJ (20 miles east of NEARfest 2002 & 2003
Posts: 2,288
Send a message via AIM to VAXman Send a message via Skype™ to VAXman
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

From: frank_lautenberg@lautenberg.senate.gov


Dear Mr. Schenkenberger :

Thank you for contacting me about copyright licenses and the "PERFORM Act." I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

In the age of the Internet and satellite radio, technology can often advance faster than the law, making it difficult to maintain a system that ensures both public access to artistic content and fair compensation for artists' efforts. U.S. copyright laws distinguish between the protection of performance rights-for example, when a s o ng is broadcast on TV or over the radio-and distribution rights, such as the sale of a CD . Both terrestrial and satellite radio stations may broadcast an artist's work in exchange for paying performance royalties, but such stations do not have to pay distribution royalties under current law.

In early 2006, satellite radio companies introduced new handheld devices that allow subscribers to record, store, and replay digital music off the air. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) contends that these devices constitute both performance and distribution of music, thereby violating copyright holders' rights.

The "Platform Equality and Remedies for Rights Holders in Music (PERFORM) Act" (S. 256) seeks to remedy this situation by streamlin ing the various processes for determining rates and terms for royalty payments by subscription, non-subscription, and satellite services into one process.

The PERFORM Act is pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee. While I am not a member of that committee, please be assured I will monitor this issue closely, and I will work to ensure that the protection of copyrights does not impede the development of new technologies and consumer choice.

Thank you again for contacting me.
__________________
VAXman -- Watcher of the moon, watcher of all.
----------------Mopper of the moon, mopper of all.
-------------------- Aural Moon's Janitorial Services
---------------------and Restroom Supplies, and Techno-patsy --

Cogito ergo iMac.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-17-2007, 06:51 AM
Rick and Roll's Avatar
Rick and Roll Rick and Roll is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baltimore suburbs
Posts: 5,086
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

I got a myspace bulletin from a band who actually drafted a release form to have their music played on internet radio. I hope to hell it doesn't come to that for everyone.

I find it upsetting that anyone can cover a song in concert or just messing around but it can't be broadcast w/o some entity sitting there with their hand out. I thought air was free.

If it does comes to a worst-case scenario (which for the record I do not think will happen), I propose we make the Aural Moon a big forum and link for musicians and fans to discuss and share their thoughts on music. Which it is now + music. Then we can be ready once the laws change again.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-17-2007, 11:29 AM
MrMagoo's Avatar
MrMagoo MrMagoo is offline
Prog rules, dogs drool!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kitsap Peninsula, WA, USA (west from Seattle)
Posts: 251
Send a message via AIM to MrMagoo
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

The judge refused to reconsider the previous ruling on Monday, so 5/15 is doomsday unless the Congress-critters decide to play

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070416/internet_radio.html
__________________
Minds are like parachutes, they only function when they're open.
- Sir Thomas Dewar
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-17-2007, 11:39 AM
Ted's Avatar
Ted Ted is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Posts: 646
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMagoo View Post
The judge refused to reconsider the previous ruling on Monday, so 5/15 is doomsday unless the Congress-critters decide to play

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070416/internet_radio.html
Goo,

Thanks for posting this... 5/15 is looking like a VERY dark day...

Regards,
Ted
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-17-2007, 11:51 AM
Rick and Roll's Avatar
Rick and Roll Rick and Roll is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Baltimore suburbs
Posts: 5,086
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMagoo View Post
The judge refused to reconsider the previous ruling on Monday, so 5/15 is doomsday unless the Congress-critters decide to play

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070416/internet_radio.html
I don't understand fully we're considered the same as live 365 etc. We accept no advertising and receive no money on sales. Non-profit is a misnomer, they sell product. We do not sell product.

I wonder if the RIAA is fully aware of all of the song sharing out there. And I wish bands would wake up and see what's going on. They're all trying to be so bent on making it big (ie Magenta) that they don't realize what a benefit internet radio is, and how their music is ripped off all the time with these websites that steal and re-sell their music.

The sentence about "terrestrial radio" is seen as a benefit to the artist (and we're not) makes me laugh.

This is my last post on this item. Whatever happens, happens. I can't waste any more mental strain on this stupidity. I'll do what I can, but I'm not hitting a gorilla with a pebble.

Let the artists take up the fight.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-17-2007, 01:28 PM
MrMagoo's Avatar
MrMagoo MrMagoo is offline
Prog rules, dogs drool!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kitsap Peninsula, WA, USA (west from Seattle)
Posts: 251
Send a message via AIM to MrMagoo
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Non-profit has nothing to do with it. RIAA wants more money, and has already paid Congress for it.

That being said, I've just read & digested (with Rolaids) the actual CRB rates findings at:
http://www.loc.gov/crb/proceedings/2...erms2005-1.pdf

Warning: nasty legal shit quoted/summarized:

Quote:
In summary, first, we determine that the minimum fee applicable to Noncommercial Webcasters is an annual non-refundable, but recoupable* $500 minimum per channel** or station payable in advance. <snip> Second, the following rates apply to Noncommercial Webcasters***: (1) an annual per station or per channel rate of $500 for stations or channels will constitute full payment for digital audio transmissions totaling not more than 159,140 ATH**** per month and (2) if in any month a Noncommercial Webcaster makes digital audio transmissions in excess of 159,140 ATH per month, then the Noncommercial Webcaster will pay additional usage fees for digital audio transmissions of sound recordings in excess of the cap as follows: a per play rate of $.0008 for 2006, a per play rate of $.0011 for 2007, a per play rate of $.0014 for 2008, a per play rate of $.0018 for 2009 and a per play rate of $.0019 for 2010.

Quote:
* In effect, payment of the $500 minimum administrative fee by Noncommercial Webcasters whose monthly ATH is below the cap will satisfy the full royalty obligations of such webcasters because it fully encompasses the per station usage fee. <snip> Therefore, as a practical matter, recoupment does not come into play for such webcasters.

** This $500 minimum fee is applicable to each individual station and each individual channel, including each individual "side channel" maintained by broadcasters. "Side channels" are channels on the website of a broadcaster that transmit eligible transmissions that are not simultaneously transmitted over-the-air by the broadcaster.

*** Noncommercial Webcasters include such licensees who are eligible nonsubscription transmission services or new subscription services, irrespective of whether they transmit music in large part or in small part.

**** Aggregate Tuning Hours or ATH refers to the total hours of programming transmitted to all listeners during the relevant time period. <snip> The number of ATH in a month could be calculated by multiplying the average number of simultaneous listeners by the average potential listening hours in a month or 730 (i.e., 365 days in a year multiplied by 24 hours in a day then divided by 12 months).
The "average number of simultaneous listeners" comes out to 218/day, so AM may be marginal, or safe... for now.
Notes:
- I couldn't find out how AVSL is calculated, it may be in the original 2002 act, or one of the predecessor acts.
- the ATH bumber is being challenged, since essentially CRB pulled it out of their ass, but that won't matter in the short term.

Now back to your regularly scheduled headache...
__________________
Minds are like parachutes, they only function when they're open.
- Sir Thomas Dewar

Last edited by MrMagoo : 04-17-2007 at 01:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-27-2007, 07:23 AM
PeterG's Avatar
PeterG PeterG is offline
Patron
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nahant ,MA
Posts: 175
Send a message via AIM to PeterG
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Just saw this posted today:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04...ct_introduced/

A bill introduced in Congress today could nullify the new rates set by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) which advocates say would put webcasters out of business.
Rep. Jay inslee (D-WA) and Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) have headed the "Internet Radio Equality Act," which aims to stop the controversial March 2 decision which puts royalty of a .08 cent per song per listener, retroactively from 2006 to 2010 on internet radio.

Advocates have dreaded the CRB ruling, which they say could raise rates between 300 to 1200 per cent for webcasters. Earlier this month, the CRB threw out an appeal by commercial webcasters, National Public Radio and others to review the new rates and postpone a May 15 deadline for the introduction of the royalty schedule.
If passed, today's bill would set new rates at 7.5 per cent of the webcaster's revenueŚ the same rate paid by satellite radio. Alternatively, webcasters could decide to pay 33 cents per hour of sound recordings transmitted to a single user.
"The illogical and unrealistic royalty rates set by the CRB have placed the future of an entire industry in jeopardy," said Jake Ward of the SaveNetRadio coalition. "This bill is a critical step to preserve this vibrant and growing medium, and to develop a truly level playing field where webcasters can compete with satellite radio."
The bill would also reset royalty rules for non-profit radio such as NPR. Public radio would be required present a report to Congress on how it should determine rates for their internet streaming media. «


This could be good news.

Keep the pressure on you senators to support this bill.


PeterG
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-27-2007, 10:45 AM
jtmckinley's Avatar
jtmckinley jtmckinley is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Farmington Hills, Michigan (near Detroit)
Posts: 367
Thumbs up Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterG View Post
Just saw this posted today:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04...ct_introduced/

A bill introduced in Congress today could nullify the new rates set by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) which advocates say would put webcasters out of business.
Rep. Jay inslee (D-WA) and Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) have headed the "Internet Radio Equality Act," which aims to stop the controversial March 2 decision which puts royalty of a .08 cent per song per listener, retroactively from 2006 to 2010 on internet radio.

*snip*

PeterG
I have written my rep. Joe Knollenberg and asked him to support this bill, fingers crossed...
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-27-2007, 11:12 AM
Ted's Avatar
Ted Ted is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Round Rock, Texas
Posts: 646
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterG View Post
Just saw this posted today:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04...ct_introduced/

A bill introduced in Congress today could nullify the new rates set by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) which advocates say would put webcasters out of business.
Rep. Jay inslee (D-WA) and Rep. Don Manzullo (R-IL) have headed the "Internet Radio Equality Act," which aims to stop the controversial March 2 decision which puts royalty of a .08 cent per song per listener, retroactively from 2006 to 2010 on internet radio.

Advocates have dreaded the CRB ruling, which they say could raise rates between 300 to 1200 per cent for webcasters. Earlier this month, the CRB threw out an appeal by commercial webcasters, National Public Radio and others to review the new rates and postpone a May 15 deadline for the introduction of the royalty schedule.
If passed, today's bill would set new rates at 7.5 per cent of the webcaster's revenueŚ the same rate paid by satellite radio. Alternatively, webcasters could decide to pay 33 cents per hour of sound recordings transmitted to a single user.
"The illogical and unrealistic royalty rates set by the CRB have placed the future of an entire industry in jeopardy," said Jake Ward of the SaveNetRadio coalition. "This bill is a critical step to preserve this vibrant and growing medium, and to develop a truly level playing field where webcasters can compete with satellite radio."
The bill would also reset royalty rules for non-profit radio such as NPR. Public radio would be required present a report to Congress on how it should determine rates for their internet streaming media. «


This could be good news.

Keep the pressure on you senators to support this bill.


PeterG

PeterG - THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.... I appreciate ANY good news.

I have written my rep - Michael McCaul and even written my two senators -to encourage them to support the bill so that it might get through the house and have easy sailing in the Senate!!

Like Jtm - I am keeping my fingers crossed!!

Ted
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05-13-2007, 11:44 AM
jtmckinley's Avatar
jtmckinley jtmckinley is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Farmington Hills, Michigan (near Detroit)
Posts: 367
Thumbs up Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

First the good news, a Senate companion bill to the House bill HR 2060 PeterG posted about previously now exists:

http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/05/...rs_introd.html

Now the bad news, a shameless propaganda piece in Business Week by the executive director of SoundExchange (the comments are more enlightening than the article IMHO). I guess John Simson is entiled to share his view, but Business Week should have given equal space to the other side of the argument, or at least done a little investigative reporting on the claims being made.

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...x _technology
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 06-19-2007, 04:54 PM
MrMagoo's Avatar
MrMagoo MrMagoo is offline
Prog rules, dogs drool!
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kitsap Peninsula, WA, USA (west from Seattle)
Posts: 251
Send a message via AIM to MrMagoo
Re: Take action! against recent copyright ruling

I finally received a direct letter from my Rep, Jay Inslee, who co-introduced HR 2060. He suggested I contact everybody interested to have them contact their congress-critters & put the heat on them. Well, maybe it was stated more blandly, but I'm passing it on... do it!
__________________
Minds are like parachutes, they only function when they're open.
- Sir Thomas Dewar
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 AM.