Archive | Legal Woes
ArsTechnica.com is reporting that music labels and radio broadcasters are in hopes to convince Congress to mandate that FM radio receivers be built into cell phones and other portable devices. While it would provide consumers more music choices, the push is more of a bargaining tool between broadcasters and label, who have been battling over the Performance Rights Act. If the mandate goes through, radio would agree to pay around $100 million a year, but in return it would get access to a larger market through these mandated chips in phones.
While radio and labels finally seem to be on good terms, the Consumer Electronics Association is opposed to this. CEA president Gary Shapiro states the following:
“The backroom scheme of the [National Association of Broadcasters] and RIAA to have Congress mandate broadcast radios in portable devices, including mobile phones, is the height of absurdity… Rather than adapt to the digital marketplace, NAB and RIAA act like buggy-whip industries that refuse to innovate and seek to impose penalties on those that do.”
Whether such legislation will be sought out by broadcaster unions and labels is still not finalized, but both sides are showing extreme interest. Whether it does happen or not, I can’t help but somewhat agree with Shapiro. With the digital marketplaces’ power in music, will mandated FM receiver chips really make a difference?
In fucking awesome news for anyone that likes to curse, a federal appeals court in New York threw out the FCC’s “fleeting expletives” policy, ruling that it was unconstitutional and threatens free speech. The Federal Communications Commission had put the policy in place in 2004 following a 2003 broadcast of the Golden Globes on NBC when Bono uttered the phrase “fuckin’ brilliant.” Following that impromptu utterance, the FCC said that the F-word in any context “inherently has a sexual connotation.” To which we say “really?” Seriously, the F-word is part of the majority of Americans’ normal speech pattern. We’re not saying it’s a good or bad thing, it’s just a thing. I’d think that pretty much 85% of the word’s use is casual speech having no sexual connotations whatsoever. The court agreed in their ruling, saying “By prohibiting all ‘patently offensive’ references to sex, sexual organs and excretion without giving adequate guidance as to what ‘patently offensive’ means, the FCC effectively chills speech, because broadcasters have no way of knowing what the FCC will find offensive.”
This is a good thing for free speech, but at the same time, it doesn’t mean that anyone on the radio or TV can release the kracken and just start cursing for the sake of cursing. Also, it should be noted that the first network to challenge the policy was Fox following the FCC citing profanity on their network uttered by Cher and Nicole Richie. Really? We’re all for free speech, but if the battle is being fought so Nicole Richie is free to curse, we’re not so sure we’re down with it.
Major labels have gotten a lot of bad PR in the past, whether giving customers the shaft via overpriced CDs, signing bands to questionable deals, or potentially cutting their own workforces. Now another group is facing a lawsuit from labels and that group sucks – literally. Yeah, we’re talking about the porn industry. ABC News is reporting that a recent lawsuit filed by Warner and a number of other labels is claiming that Florida based RK Netmedia infringed on the copyright of a number of artists from Katy Perry to Justin Timberlake. The labels are claiming that they are owed compensation in the tens of millions of dollars for everything from songs being featured in videos to lip-syncing. Not only do the labels say the instances were “deliberate and calculated,” but they are seeking compensation of $150,000 per case.
Marc Randazza, the attorney for RK, claims that the music in question is part of the background where certain videos were filmed such as nightclubs. He says the intention was never to infringe on copyrighted material, but as you can imagine, that doesn’t mean much to labels who have been losing money for some time now. The case is still so young so it’s hard to tell how serious it is, but with the money labels are willing to throw into lawsuits instead of developing marketing plans that actually work, it’s safe to say they won’t be backing down anytime soon.
I can see where the labels are coming from because it’s their artists’ music. I can see where the porn industry is coming from, because music is an important part of many… short films (and frankly I’d rather hear Katy Perry than Jenna Jameson’s fake moans.) But all in all, the case reeks of desperation on behalf of the recording industry. The porn industry is one of the most recession-proof industries out there, and Justin Timberlake, Michael Jackson, and others named are still bankable, so it makes sense the labels would go after them. But I wonder- cue cheesy music- if they found a way to coexist, could there be a compromise? Rammstein and the porn industry seem to be doing just fine together.
Regardless of your thoughts on illegal downloading, all you have to do is look at the Billboard charts and ten years of declining sales to see labels and artists alike are losing money due to piracy. Yesterday, the Obama Administration, who have undoubtedly taken more than their fair share of lobbyist dollars from the RIAA and the MPAA, announced a crackdown on piracy. It’s the first-ever strategic plan on intellectual property enforcement.
“This is theft, clear and simple,” Vice President Joe Biden stated. “It’s no different than a guy walking down Fifth Avenue and smashing the window of a Tiffanys and reaching in and grabbing what’s in the window.” While music is definitely part of the crackdown, the program seems all-encompassing, also cracking down on those that pirate movies, TV shows, video games, computer software, pharmaceuticals, counterfeit goods, and more. According to a report by the United States Property Enforcement Coordinator (yeah, that’s an official title), just motion picture and video piracy costs the U.S. economy $20.5 billion a year in lost output, $5.5 billion annual in lost eranings for U.S. workers and 141,939 jobs that would have been created. That’s likely a lot more than those impacted by the music industry.
From the look of the announcement, it seems like it will have more global implications, targeting larger scale operations than going after you for downloading an album or two off a file sharing site. But at the end of the day, I can see Biden’s point. We’re way past the point of going back to the days where people will start paying for everything they download, but if you really like a band, buy their album, or at least their T-shirt when they come to your town.
While famed New York venue CBGB closed in 2006, its name will live on forever – or will it? CBGB Holdings LLC, the company that bought the right to license and market the CBGB name, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection this past Friday in Manhattan, according to the Wall Street Journal. The company had paid $3.5 million for the company’s intellectual property in 2008. In its filings, the company reported assets and debts in the range of $1 millon to $10 million. That’s a hell of a lot of T-shirts.
10 years ago, to think that CBGB would be closed five years later was almost incomprehensible. In addition to being known as the birthplace of punk, it also hosted many a Sunday afternoon hardcore matinée. Even when the club closed, it seemed like its name would live on forever, so to think the . The venue’s logo is almost as iconic as the legend of the club. And while CBGB Holdings might be failing, it’s almost a certainty that someone else will pick up the intellectual property of New York’s most famous venue.
File-sharing service Limewire will be around for at least another two weeks after being given a temporary stay of execution by a U.S. District Judge. According to CNET, a motion was filed on Friday by the RIAA to shut down the service. Judge Kimba Wood, who granted summary judgment in favor of the RIAA’s claims that Lime Group committed copyright infringement last month, gave Lime Wire’s lawyers two weeks to respond to the motion. Once Lime Wire responds to the RIAA, the RIAA (which is the trade group for the big four record companies) will have two weeks to respond to them, but Wood could make a ruling as soon as she gets Lime Wire’s response.
Instead of offering commentary or our take on the 10 year-old file sharing service, we’ll just make an observation here: doesn’t Lime Wire’s logo look a lot like BP’s?
It’s getting tougher and tougher to make a living as an artist, and the city of Philadelphia is trying to make it harder for venues and promoters too. Philly Councilmen Darrell Clarke and Bill Greenlee have put in a proposition for bill No. 100267, which will tack on a new list of requirements and regulations for concert promoters both professional and DIY. Many are arguing that the new requirements will eliminate many of the city’s music promoters as they will be liable not only for the actions of concert goers during the show but afterwards as well.
According to CityPaper.net:
The bill requires that every permit application include a copy of the contract between the venue and the promoter — in effect, making rental prices and rates for each individual promoter a matter of public record . To make matters worse, the cops can deny a permit for any reason and without explanation up to 10 days before the event — which could devastate businesses that fronted costs, to say nothing of destroying the credibility of those trying to book events.
Greenlee states that the reason for the changes in policy are related to a number of “event-driven disruptions throughout the city” including a sold-out show at the Comcast Center that resulted in many concert-goers taking to the nearby streets. The thing that has a lot of people confused on this end is the fact that the Comcast Center is a skyscraper, not a venue, and after searching for two days and asking a few people we know in Philly, we couldn’t find what concert it was that supposedly triggered this bill. Whatever the actual cause of this proposed bill is seems trivial considering that if it’s passed, the cost to businesses would likely be more than what the Congressmen are trying to prevent.
Check out what the actual bill entails here, and if you don’t like it sign the petition here.
Anyone that’s been following our coverage of EMI Music knows that the music group has been on some pretty shaky ground financially. The group’s owner, Terra Firma, is asking investors for about $557 million to keep them from being sold. Now Reuters reports that Sony Music may be considering a bid for them.
Back in March, EMI had held talks with both Sony and Universal about a licensing deal in North America, but nothing came to fruition. However, in a quote in German paper Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (that name beats the hell out of the Times!) Sony Music head Rolf Schmidt-Holz was quoted as saying “We are in a position that allows us to seize every opportunity in the market – including EMI.”
Meanwhile Terra Firma needs the financial support of 75% of its fund’s 200 investors by this Friday (14), when they’ll present a compliance certificate to Citigroup showing they can meet its current obligations. New EMI Executive Chairman Charles Allen is apparently looking at some new business plans for the company, according to premier-finance.com. Those include selling off their Japanese business and possibly having Warner Music distribute them in America, with them making an upfront payment. However, unlike Schimidt-Holz, Warner CEO Edgar Bronfman gave no comment.
EMI Labels include Capitol and Virgin, while EMI distributes metal labels including Century Media, Nuclear Blast and Earache.
The assets of music label TVT have been bought by Bicycle Music, a Los Angeles-area music publishing company, Billboard reports. The assets include 700 masters, or about 80 albums worth of material. Bands signed to TVT over their 25 year history include Nine Inch Nails, Vision of Disorder, Gravity Kills, KMFDM and Sevendust, among many others. Bicycle plans on re-releasing Nine Inch Nails’ debut album, Pretty Hate Machine, which has been out of print and unavailable digitally for several years.
Bicycle acquired the masters from Prudential Securities Credit Corp., who gave TVT $23.5 million in backing in the form of a 10 year loan in 1999. While TVT paid $10 million of it through 2002, the decline of music sales led them to try to renegotiate terms, which led to a round of lawsuits and Prudential ultimately acquiring the catalog. TVT filed for bankruptcy in 2008.
We spoke earlier this year about the Performance Rights Act. In a nutshell, it’s legislation working its way through the House and Senate that, if passed, would pay artists and musicians when their songs get played on AM and FM radio. Right now, only the songwriters and publishers get paid, and the United States is one of the few countries that doesn’t pay the performers. Digital Music News reports that the Commerce Department has expressed “strong support” for the Act in a letter to Senator Patrick Leahy. “At the national level, establishing a public performance right in sound recordings and eliminating the exemption ofr terrestrial broadcasters follows principles of US copyright law,” the letter says in part.
Radio is losing a lot of money right now, and if this is passed, they’ll lose even more. Not surprisingly, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is vigorously protesting the Act. BUt regardless, there’s no reason this bill shouldn’t be passed. Satellite, cable, and internet radio pay artists when their music gets played. The United States finds themselves among Iran, North Korea and China as some of the few countries in the world that don’t pay artists when their music gets played. And since there’s no performance act currently, the other countries in the world that do pay artists when their music gets played don’t have to pay American acts, so that’s more money artists losing out on. Sorry radio, but I think it’s time to
ArsTechnica.com is reporting that music labels and radio broadcasters are in hopes to convince Congress to mandate that FM radio receivers be built into cell phones and other portable devices. While it would provide consumers more music choices, the push is more of a bargaining tool between broadcasters and label, who have been battling over the Performance Rights Act. If the mandate goes through, radio would agree to pay around $100 million a year, but in return it would get access to a larger market through these mandated chips in phones.
Posted by Zach Shaw on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:30 pm
Legal Woes, Radio