Podshow's Gold Mine, the RIAA, Sound Exchange, and sucking less

Warning: this content is older than 365 days. It may be out of date and no longer relevant.

Time to turn the Podshow discussion more positive with an idea they can execute on, instead of just complaining. One of my many causes is helping podsafe independent artists as much as I can, and this year I’ve been fortunate to be part of two projects to do that – Bum Rush the Charts (yes, still waiting on IODA to get me sales data) and Virtual Hot Wings.

A few friends and I were standing around in CC Chapman’s U Turn Cafe in Second Life the other night and had an idea the other night that I would LOVE for someone at Podshow to steal/use/borrow/make. Podshow is the only company that can legally execute on the idea because they own the PMN.

From the PMN license for artists:

“Broadcast” means Work or an acceptable Derivative Work thereof that is played publicly for the benefit of interested listeners, and particularly when such Work is played by a listener accessing a digital file such as a podcast or streaming media file.

3. You hereby waive the following rights to any and all musical compositions:
a. the right to recover performance royalties under blanket licenses, including the right to collect such royalties individually or through a performance rights society.
b. the right to recover mechanical rights or statutory royalties.
c. the right to recover any royalty that may be applicable for public digital performance of the Work, such as webcasting or podcasting.

From the PMN license for podcasters:

“Broadcast” means Work or an acceptable Derivative Work thereof that is played publicly for the benefit of interested listeners, and particularly when such Work is played by a listener accessing a digital file such as a podcast or streaming media file.

2. Subject to these Terms of Use, You are hereby granted the following world-wide, non-transferable, non-exclusive, royalty-free rights
a. the right, and to access the Music database and reproduce each Work included therein for the purpose of Broadcasting the Work, including the right to use and incorporate each Work into a Collective Work, which may itself be Broadcast.
c. the right to create and distribute webcasts and Podcasts that contain the Works

What am I getting at? The PMN contract overrides the statutory royalty issues that SoundExchange and the RIAA have been nailing Internet radio/streaming radio stations with. By my read, as long as you are a valid, registered podcasting member of the PMN, you can play podsafe music and NOT have to pay SoundExchange/RIAA. If you run an Internet radio station, record all your shows with podsafe music from the PMN and publish them as podcasts as well, and you get to stay in business and not pay SoundExchange a cent.

Pandora’s been making noise about going bye-bye due to increased web radio rates. A lot of other small Internet radio stations are saying the same. The law around SoundExchange is that it is a compulsory license – if you don’t have any other form of licensing, you MUST pay up to the RIAA, whether or not the artist ever sees a dime of the revenue. The law also states that the compulsory license can be overridden with a license directly from the artist, and Podshow has that license with the PMN.

So the idea can go one of three ways:

1. Give/sell/rent/grant Pandora a license to use the music on the PMN under the terms of the PMN license. This effectively ends their liability for royalties to SoundExchange, AND provides a great tool for exposure to podsafe artists.

2. Built an equivalent Pandora-esque system using PMN artists.

3. Alert every single streaming internet radio station in the United States and wherever draconian RIAA-sponsored laws apply that with a registration to the PMN as a broadcaster, they too can eliminate SoundExchange royalties as long as they only play podsafe music from the PMN.

It also almost goes without saying that Podshow should be negotiating playlist time with lots of small, independent internet radio stations for its contracted podcasters, because those podcasts on the air also incur no SoundExchange penalties. Get Accident Hash or In Over Your Head on the hundreds of college radio stations, web stations, etc. so that not only are more people exposed to podcasting, but the Podshow family of podcasters also gets more promotion.

So, to Joe Carpenter, Adam Curry, Jersey Todd, and everyone else involved in music at Podshow who was party to the last discussion about Podshow, here’s an opportunity to single-handedly save internet radio, earn goodwill, promote the PMN, and most of all, help podsafe artists all at once.

This one’s on the house. Go to it, guys!


Comments

43 responses to “Podshow's Gold Mine, the RIAA, Sound Exchange, and sucking less”

  1. I love it! Let’s get the ball rolling!

  2. Here here!!!

    Of course, my first question will be “how many artists are going to complain if they open to Pandora?” Assumption is that the PMN was for podcasts. I would assume several, and that may have people shy away from submissions at first.

    Fortunately, I believe most would LOVE the extra promotion, especially if use metrics were reported back to the PMN. The ability to get play on various streaming stations at the same time is even more enticing for artists to get on the PMN.

    There really isn’t much of a difference between streaming a podcast and internet radio. Podcasts are more permanent, and I believe have a higher level of engagement with a song or artist (at least more so than streaming radio).

    I personally think it’s a great idea, and I hope to see some additional conversation on it.

  3. Seems like you got in the “zone” on this one Chris. Win/win.

  4. As an artist, I’m all for this. More exposure, better rotation, and… well, like Mark said win/win. RIAA collects for me? When will I see this. Meh. Bad suits taking my intellectual property values to the basement.

  5. I was surprised that this idea hadn’t drawn a lot of attention by Podshow when they have the license, the access and the people to make it happen.

    To Podshow: You have ability to make something happen here for independent artists. You have the ability to make a difference in the music industry. You have the ability to create something with a podsafe radio that would make a remarkable difference to all the hardworking musicians whose music is listed on PMN. All it takes is a little time and effort on your part.

    Chris Brogan asked the other day, while writing about superpowers, “If you’re not …developing the larger picture around you, what are you doing instead? Why aren’t you taking on the larger questions and taking your swing at it?”

    Show us your superpowers, Podshow.

  6. How can I delete an uploaded mp3 on my artist page at Podsafe Music Network?

  7. I have a page at GarageBand, but I do online music marketing for friends, and am now experimenting with Podsafe. I follow you on Twitter and find your tweets of great value.

    http://twitter.com/vaspers

  8. Zack "The Mothman" Daggy Avatar
    Zack “The Mothman” Daggy

    I love it! Let’s get the ball rolling!

  9. Here here!!!

    Of course, my first question will be “how many artists are going to complain if they open to Pandora?” Assumption is that the PMN was for podcasts. I would assume several, and that may have people shy away from submissions at first.

    Fortunately, I believe most would LOVE the extra promotion, especially if use metrics were reported back to the PMN. The ability to get play on various streaming stations at the same time is even more enticing for artists to get on the PMN.

    There really isn’t much of a difference between streaming a podcast and internet radio. Podcasts are more permanent, and I believe have a higher level of engagement with a song or artist (at least more so than streaming radio).

    I personally think it’s a great idea, and I hope to see some additional conversation on it.

  10. Seems like you got in the “zone” on this one Chris. Win/win.

  11. As an artist, I’m all for this. More exposure, better rotation, and… well, like Mark said win/win. RIAA collects for me? When will I see this. Meh. Bad suits taking my intellectual property values to the basement.

  12. I was surprised that this idea hadn’t drawn a lot of attention by Podshow when they have the license, the access and the people to make it happen.

    To Podshow: You have ability to make something happen here for independent artists. You have the ability to make a difference in the music industry. You have the ability to create something with a podsafe radio that would make a remarkable difference to all the hardworking musicians whose music is listed on PMN. All it takes is a little time and effort on your part.

    Chris Brogan asked the other day, while writing about superpowers, “If you’re not …developing the larger picture around you, what are you doing instead? Why aren’t you taking on the larger questions and taking your swing at it?”

    Show us your superpowers, Podshow.

  13. How can I delete an uploaded mp3 on my artist page at Podsafe Music Network?

  14. I have a page at GarageBand, but I do online music marketing for friends, and am now experimenting with Podsafe. I follow you on Twitter and find your tweets of great value.

    http://twitter.com/vaspers

  15. Tried to embed the Podshow player for Anjibee’s podcast, but when, in Firefox and IE, I clicked on the player, all I got was a blank hole, empty space in my sidebar.

  16. Tried to embed the Podshow player for Anjibee’s podcast, but when, in Firefox and IE, I clicked on the player, all I got was a blank hole, empty space in my sidebar.

  17. As the previous commentator points out – it’s impossible for artists to remove tracks from their listing. This, plus an apparent freeze on site development has made the Podsafe Music ‘network’ something of a bad joke.

    Whilst it never was that easy to navigate the site it’s now so full of unremoveable clutter and false entries plus other bizarre bugs that it’s become a complete 1.0 style jumble sale that makes even myspace look like a well oiled machine.

    You’re post reads like a great new way to sell tickets to Disneyland in a car whose engine seized up years ago. I’d rather just walk thanks.

  18. As the previous commentator points out – it’s impossible for artists to remove tracks from their listing. This, plus an apparent freeze on site development has made the Podsafe Music ‘network’ something of a bad joke.

    Whilst it never was that easy to navigate the site it’s now so full of unremoveable clutter and false entries plus other bizarre bugs that it’s become a complete 1.0 style jumble sale that makes even myspace look like a well oiled machine.

    You’re post reads like a great new way to sell tickets to Disneyland in a car whose engine seized up years ago. I’d rather just walk thanks.

  19. Bravo Chris. Something the IR network did early on was draft a license agreement that allowed us the flexibility to promote artists on podcasts, ‘net radio, direct downloads, even bittorrent or compilation CD’s (non profit ones.)

    With the muscle the PMN has, I’m a bit surprised they haven’t really escaped the podcasting box yet, but for all the artists involved in their network, I hope they start digesting your advice.

    Good stuff man.
    J@iR

  20. Bravo Chris. Something the IR network did early on was draft a license agreement that allowed us the flexibility to promote artists on podcasts, ‘net radio, direct downloads, even bittorrent or compilation CD’s (non profit ones.)

    With the muscle the PMN has, I’m a bit surprised they haven’t really escaped the podcasting box yet, but for all the artists involved in their network, I hope they start digesting your advice.

    Good stuff man.
    J@iR

  21. Chris, I’ll follow you to the gates of hell. Hopefully, it won’t come to that.

    I am not 100% convinced that the PMN license overcomes the Soundexchange problem. I don’t practice copyright law. It certainly would be nice to have an artist contact Soundexchange to get their position regarding the PMN. I certainly wouldn’t bet my license on them saying that they’re not entitled to anything – just a hunch. Remember, the PMN license has a very big and boldfaced “hold harmless” clause in it, and everyone still needs to realize that we still are in the Wild West in terms of online copyright law, and the RIAA is certainly looking for any revenue stream they can find. I know – another neurotic lawyer, but at least I’m on your side.

    That being said, I love the idea. The problem that I have with most streaming and satellite radio is the lack of hosts. If you combine the excellent PMN tunes with enthusiastic hosts, you really can have something special – i.e. a return to music that matters. I would be really excited to be a part of something like that.

  22. Chris, I’ll follow you to the gates of hell. Hopefully, it won’t come to that.

    I am not 100% convinced that the PMN license overcomes the Soundexchange problem. I don’t practice copyright law. It certainly would be nice to have an artist contact Soundexchange to get their position regarding the PMN. I certainly wouldn’t bet my license on them saying that they’re not entitled to anything – just a hunch. Remember, the PMN license has a very big and boldfaced “hold harmless” clause in it, and everyone still needs to realize that we still are in the Wild West in terms of online copyright law, and the RIAA is certainly looking for any revenue stream they can find. I know – another neurotic lawyer, but at least I’m on your side.

    That being said, I love the idea. The problem that I have with most streaming and satellite radio is the lack of hosts. If you combine the excellent PMN tunes with enthusiastic hosts, you really can have something special – i.e. a return to music that matters. I would be really excited to be a part of something like that.

  23. Jersey Todd – as far as I can tell, I -think- it does, but I am definitely not a lawyer. SoundExchange says this in their FAQ:

    Does SoundExchange cover downloads?
    No. SoundExchange only covers performance rights. A download is governed by the reproduction right in sound recordings, which is not subject to the compulsory license and which must be licensed directly from the SRCO, usually the record company or artist.

    If I join SoundExchange can I still negotiate a license with a webcaster if I want to?
    Yes. Although membership in SoundExchange prohibits you from licensing your sound recording copyrights to another royalty collective for purposes of collecting and distributing Sections 112 and 114 statutory royalties on your behalf, your membership in SoundExchange does not in any way limit your ability to enter into direct (i.e., nonstatutory) licenses of any sound recordings that you own, whether with webcasters or other potential statutory licensees. SoundExchange simply requires that SRCOs notify it of any direct licenses entered into with statutory licensees or digital music service providers so that it can ensure that payments received from services that hold direct licenses to certain recordings are calculated correctly and allocated properly.

    My read on the latter part is that if you join SoundExchange, you enter an exclusive agreement with them to collect royalties on your behalf, but if you don’t, then only the statutory regulations apply, and those can be overridden with a license from the SRCO (sound recording copyright owner), which would be the artist or label registered on the PMN.

    Hey, wait a minute, you ARE a lawyer. You tell me! 🙂

    The relevant pieces of law are sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright law, which are here:

    http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#112

    http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#114

    Any other lawyers – especially copyright/IP lawyers – know whether the PMN’s license is sufficient legal ground for webcasters and Internet radio to play podsafe artists under PMN terms without having to pay a dime to the RIAA/SoundExchange?

  24. Jersey Todd – as far as I can tell, I -think- it does, but I am definitely not a lawyer. SoundExchange says this in their FAQ:

    Does SoundExchange cover downloads?
    No. SoundExchange only covers performance rights. A download is governed by the reproduction right in sound recordings, which is not subject to the compulsory license and which must be licensed directly from the SRCO, usually the record company or artist.

    If I join SoundExchange can I still negotiate a license with a webcaster if I want to?
    Yes. Although membership in SoundExchange prohibits you from licensing your sound recording copyrights to another royalty collective for purposes of collecting and distributing Sections 112 and 114 statutory royalties on your behalf, your membership in SoundExchange does not in any way limit your ability to enter into direct (i.e., nonstatutory) licenses of any sound recordings that you own, whether with webcasters or other potential statutory licensees. SoundExchange simply requires that SRCOs notify it of any direct licenses entered into with statutory licensees or digital music service providers so that it can ensure that payments received from services that hold direct licenses to certain recordings are calculated correctly and allocated properly.

    My read on the latter part is that if you join SoundExchange, you enter an exclusive agreement with them to collect royalties on your behalf, but if you don’t, then only the statutory regulations apply, and those can be overridden with a license from the SRCO (sound recording copyright owner), which would be the artist or label registered on the PMN.

    Hey, wait a minute, you ARE a lawyer. You tell me! 🙂

    The relevant pieces of law are sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright law, which are here:

    http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#112

    http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#114

    Any other lawyers – especially copyright/IP lawyers – know whether the PMN’s license is sufficient legal ground for webcasters and Internet radio to play podsafe artists under PMN terms without having to pay a dime to the RIAA/SoundExchange?

  25. @vaspers the grate
    @Conrad Slater

    Adjusting the previously uploaded track is pretty straightforward. Log into your PMN account, and next to the song in question, click on the link that says ‘update’. From there you are presented with four choices:
    – sell this song
    – make available for podcasters to play
    – offer as free download to listeners
    – remove from site

    Choose the appropriate one(s) that you want, and click on Update song. It’s that easy.

    Joe

  26. @vaspers the grate
    @Conrad Slater

    Adjusting the previously uploaded track is pretty straightforward. Log into your PMN account, and next to the song in question, click on the link that says ‘update’. From there you are presented with four choices:
    – sell this song
    – make available for podcasters to play
    – offer as free download to listeners
    – remove from site

    Choose the appropriate one(s) that you want, and click on Update song. It’s that easy.

    Joe

  27. @Chris: I had a discussion with Collette Vogel about this, and the grey area w/ Soundexchange & Podcasting is this:

    They don’t cover downloads (which most consider podcasting to be) but if a listener streams the track or the episode from my site, does it fall under Internet Radio since it’s being streamed? She couldn’t answer that, and I have found no one that can.

    Alternately, does IODA’s Promonet also include the same waiver of royalty collections?

    Lotsa confusion here…

  28. @Jason – you know, I combed IODA, and I can’t find anything. The PMN explicitly includes streaming media on both the artist and broadcaster side, so a flash version of your show being streamed live would still be covered under the PMN license, if my read of the PMN license and the regulations is correct.

    Times like this when I wish I’d gone to law school after all 🙂

  29. Ok- Let’s talk about copyright law in some simple terms.
    Rule One: You need to look at a whole contract and not isolated clauses because often the clauses inter-relate.

    Rule 2: The freedom to contract means you can agree to just about anything between two parties and have it be enforceable, with some bright line exceptions about fraud, immorality, etc. (No paying for sexual favors and then enforcing it as a private services contract under law.)

    From Intellectual Property Stephen M McJohn 2d Edition:
    Copyright applies to original works of authorship as soon as they are fixed in any tangible medium of expression. This means you’ve got to write down that song, melody, phrase- not just say it aloud; record it or somehow or another memorialize it in order to have a copyright in the original work.
    These rights go to the author, but it can be transferred to others. If a work is created by an employee, the author is the employer. This means if you are under contract to a record label, unless otherwise specified, you can be the employee and they own the right to your work as an author, as they are probably playing you to create this work- so the owner of a jingle is not always the creator, but often their boss or company.
    The copyright holder has exclusive rights to make copies of the work, display the work publicly, adapt thew work, or perform th work publicly.
    The problem arises when you start distributing rights to others- what rights are you granting to others, and which ones aren’t you granting?

    So as an artist, you create a song (assuming you aren’t stealing, sampling or borrowing someone else’s lyrics or musical score) and you own it, hook line and sinker, and can do what you want to with it. It’s to whom, for how long, under what conditions, for how much money, etc. where the problem arises.

    Any specific questions I can research/answer etc.?

  30. @Whitney: the issue is with SoundExchange, the Copyright Board, and the Podsafe Music Network. It’s my understanding that the Copyright Royalty Board established that webcasters who play streaming internet music stations are required under law, without a license, to pay royalties for all music played as dictated in the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004.

    http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/pl108-419.html

    Further, the CRB designated SoundExchange to be the reporting and collections agency for all music played, regardless of whether or not the artist was a member of SoundExchange or the RIAA.

    http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr24309.html

    The exemption that I read in the law, to the best of my knowledge, says that SRCOs are permitted to license out their work under other licenses to broadcasters and distribution outlets and directly negotiate any royalties to be paid, if any. The existence of such a license would override the statutory rates dictated by the CRB and SoundExchange.

    The PMN License above is here:

    http://music.podshow.com/music/artistTerms.htm

    By my read, Section 3 of the Artist Terms would constitute a separate license and waiver of royalties for streamed audio.

    Am I correct, or should I have gone to law school?

  31. This is really complicated to read through, but emphemeral rights inder 17 USC 112 applies to broadcast stations, and licensed FCC transmission.
    and it is not an infringement of copyright for a transmitting organization entitled to transmit to the public a performance or display of a work, under a license, including a statutory license under section 114(f) [17 USC 114(f)], or transfer of the copyright or under the limitations on exclusive rights in sound recordings specified by section 114(a) [17 USC 114(a)], or for a transmitting organization that is a broadcast radio or television station licensed as such by the Federal Communications Commission and that makes a broadcast transmission of a performance of a sound recording in a digital format on a nonsubscription basis, to make no more than one copy or phonorecord of a particular transmission program embodying the performance or display, if–

    (A)
    the copy or phonorecord is retained and used solely by the transmitting organization that made it, and no further copies or phonorecords are reproduced from it; and
    (B)
    the copy or phonorecord is used solely for the transmitting organization’s own transmissions within its local service area, or for purposes of archival preservation or security; and
    (C)
    unless preserved exclusively for archival purposes, the copy or phonorecord is destroyed within six months from the date the transmission program was first transmitted to the public.

    I take this to mean a broadcast station can make a transient recording of work, and podcast it, but can’t then go an sell it without violating copyright.

    The bulk of the amendment is about what judges can and cannot do when they are asked to step in and negotiate rights and fees.

    I believe you are right that the PMN license is a separate license; and that people can negotiate what rates they feel are fair; It’s the collection de facto and random rate sets I haven’t sorted yet.

  32. @Chris: I had a discussion with Collette Vogel about this, and the grey area w/ Soundexchange & Podcasting is this:

    They don’t cover downloads (which most consider podcasting to be) but if a listener streams the track or the episode from my site, does it fall under Internet Radio since it’s being streamed? She couldn’t answer that, and I have found no one that can.

    Alternately, does IODA’s Promonet also include the same waiver of royalty collections?

    Lotsa confusion here…

  33. @Jason – you know, I combed IODA, and I can’t find anything. The PMN explicitly includes streaming media on both the artist and broadcaster side, so a flash version of your show being streamed live would still be covered under the PMN license, if my read of the PMN license and the regulations is correct.

    Times like this when I wish I’d gone to law school after all 🙂

  34. Ok- Let’s talk about copyright law in some simple terms.
    Rule One: You need to look at a whole contract and not isolated clauses because often the clauses inter-relate.

    Rule 2: The freedom to contract means you can agree to just about anything between two parties and have it be enforceable, with some bright line exceptions about fraud, immorality, etc. (No paying for sexual favors and then enforcing it as a private services contract under law.)

    From Intellectual Property Stephen M McJohn 2d Edition:
    Copyright applies to original works of authorship as soon as they are fixed in any tangible medium of expression. This means you’ve got to write down that song, melody, phrase- not just say it aloud; record it or somehow or another memorialize it in order to have a copyright in the original work.
    These rights go to the author, but it can be transferred to others. If a work is created by an employee, the author is the employer. This means if you are under contract to a record label, unless otherwise specified, you can be the employee and they own the right to your work as an author, as they are probably playing you to create this work- so the owner of a jingle is not always the creator, but often their boss or company.
    The copyright holder has exclusive rights to make copies of the work, display the work publicly, adapt thew work, or perform th work publicly.
    The problem arises when you start distributing rights to others- what rights are you granting to others, and which ones aren’t you granting?

    So as an artist, you create a song (assuming you aren’t stealing, sampling or borrowing someone else’s lyrics or musical score) and you own it, hook line and sinker, and can do what you want to with it. It’s to whom, for how long, under what conditions, for how much money, etc. where the problem arises.

    Any specific questions I can research/answer etc.?

  35. @Whitney: the issue is with SoundExchange, the Copyright Board, and the Podsafe Music Network. It’s my understanding that the Copyright Royalty Board established that webcasters who play streaming internet music stations are required under law, without a license, to pay royalties for all music played as dictated in the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004.

    http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/pl108-419.html

    Further, the CRB designated SoundExchange to be the reporting and collections agency for all music played, regardless of whether or not the artist was a member of SoundExchange or the RIAA.

    http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr24309.html

    The exemption that I read in the law, to the best of my knowledge, says that SRCOs are permitted to license out their work under other licenses to broadcasters and distribution outlets and directly negotiate any royalties to be paid, if any. The existence of such a license would override the statutory rates dictated by the CRB and SoundExchange.

    The PMN License above is here:

    http://music.podshow.com/music/artistTerms.htm

    By my read, Section 3 of the Artist Terms would constitute a separate license and waiver of royalties for streamed audio.

    Am I correct, or should I have gone to law school?

  36. I can’t believe that I got a “C” in copyright law…all I can remember is something about Ansell Adams paintings and that I had a crush on the girl in the front row that I never spoke to. Yeah, I really accomplished something by taking that elective.

    That being said, I’m still punting on this one…like anything else, nothing’s certain until a Judge says its so, and even then, there’s always Appeals and the like…

    Wasn’t Adam’s savant-attorney supposed to do some research and come back to the DSC on this issue?

  37. I can’t believe that I got a “C” in copyright law…all I can remember is something about Ansell Adams paintings and that I had a crush on the girl in the front row that I never spoke to. Yeah, I really accomplished something by taking that elective.

    That being said, I’m still punting on this one…like anything else, nothing’s certain until a Judge says its so, and even then, there’s always Appeals and the like…

    Wasn’t Adam’s savant-attorney supposed to do some research and come back to the DSC on this issue?

  38. I don’t know, Todd, but let me tell you this. When it comes to savants and attorneys and all that, you will not find a greater superhero than Whitney Hoffman. In addition to being a podcaster, an organizer of PodCamp NYC, and an all around great person, she’s also a kick-ass lawyer. Glad to see the two of you are collaborating on PodCamp Philly.

  39. I don’t know, Todd, but let me tell you this. When it comes to savants and attorneys and all that, you will not find a greater superhero than Whitney Hoffman. In addition to being a podcaster, an organizer of PodCamp NYC, and an all around great person, she’s also a kick-ass lawyer. Glad to see the two of you are collaborating on PodCamp Philly.

  40. This is really complicated to read through, but emphemeral rights inder 17 USC 112 applies to broadcast stations, and licensed FCC transmission.
    and it is not an infringement of copyright for a transmitting organization entitled to transmit to the public a performance or display of a work, under a license, including a statutory license under section 114(f) [17 USC 114(f)], or transfer of the copyright or under the limitations on exclusive rights in sound recordings specified by section 114(a) [17 USC 114(a)], or for a transmitting organization that is a broadcast radio or television station licensed as such by the Federal Communications Commission and that makes a broadcast transmission of a performance of a sound recording in a digital format on a nonsubscription basis, to make no more than one copy or phonorecord of a particular transmission program embodying the performance or display, if–

    (A)
    the copy or phonorecord is retained and used solely by the transmitting organization that made it, and no further copies or phonorecords are reproduced from it; and
    (B)
    the copy or phonorecord is used solely for the transmitting organization’s own transmissions within its local service area, or for purposes of archival preservation or security; and
    (C)
    unless preserved exclusively for archival purposes, the copy or phonorecord is destroyed within six months from the date the transmission program was first transmitted to the public.

    I take this to mean a broadcast station can make a transient recording of work, and podcast it, but can’t then go an sell it without violating copyright.

    The bulk of the amendment is about what judges can and cannot do when they are asked to step in and negotiate rights and fees.

    I believe you are right that the PMN license is a separate license; and that people can negotiate what rates they feel are fair; It’s the collection de facto and random rate sets I haven’t sorted yet.

  41. All legal jargon aside, I think that any creation, whether it is music, writing, poetry, etc. should be protected as a work of original content. It is important to remember why these laws exist, they act also as an incentive for those who are afraid of never collecting on their work.

  42. All legal jargon aside, I think that any creation, whether it is music, writing, poetry, etc. should be protected as a work of original content. It is important to remember why these laws exist, they act also as an incentive for those who are afraid of never collecting on their work.

  43. Hello,

    I discover your blog with a research on the radio.
    I use it to announce you the arrival of the new website of RCM (Small French local radio).
    I also offer you to listen to us ( http://www.rcmlaradio.fr a ‘good morning’ on Tchat will please us).

    Excuse me for bad English, it is not my native language (if you speak three languages you are trilingual, if you speak two languages you are bilingual and if you speak a single language you are French 😉

    Thank you for this small message on your blog.

    Zeb

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This