Copyright Office May Have Just Added New Royalties For Webcasts

from the you-can't-be-serious dept

Well, this is just downright disturbing. Jon Healy has a quick summary of a totally unexpected and unnecessary proposed rulemaking from the Copyright Office that could add additional royalties that webcasters would need to pay (on top of the already onerous webcasting rates). Basically, the Copyright Office had been asked to decide on a totally different question concerning royalties back in 2000. That issue isn't even in question any more, as the two sides had already worked out their differences, and the Copyright Office didn't do much to give an official answer on that question anyway.

Instead, it came up with an idea out of the blue that music publishers are entitled to an additional mechanical royalty for non-interactive streams (e.g., webcasts, satellite radio, etc.). As Healy explains, this makes no sense and seems to go against previous agreements on these types of royalties. Mechanical royalties are supposed to be for actual copies of the music. Non-interactive streams are basically the same as radio -- which requires performance royalties, but not mechanical royalties.

This reminds me of the column by Rasmus Fleischer we wrote about a little while ago, where he noted how silly copyright law can get with all these different royalty rates that were designed for a different time. The borderlines between radio, streams, downloads, recordings and all other ways of accessing and hearing music are blending together, and trying to match the old rights to the new ways that people interact with music just leads to more problems -- such as multiple levels of royalties all being heaped upon the same single action, making it effectively uneconomical to actually do the most natural thing with music: play it online.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, copyright office, royalties, webcasts


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Cranky in my old age, 22 Jul 2008 @ 8:25am

    I Know

    Let's charge people every time a song hits their brain. We could make a mint off of people who get songs stuck in their head...

    Pretty soon, the only thing on radios and webcasts will be Bill O'reilly, Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh and all the rest of the puerile drivel...

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 22 Jul 2008 @ 12:34pm

      Re: I Know

      I think calling Bill O'Reilly, Howard Stern, and Rush Limbaugh "puerile drivel" is really insulting...

      ..to puerile drivel everywhere!

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Willton, 22 Jul 2008 @ 10:06am

    Compulsory licensing is outdated

    Compulsory licensing, like mechanical licences and the like, was basically a regime that was designed to further anti-trust concerns. In this day and age, those concerns don't carry much weight anymore. The compulsory licensing regime should be scrapped; copyright holders should be able to assert their rights in bargains for exchange.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    deathbychichi, 22 Jul 2008 @ 10:49am

    Have to wonder if the copyright board is trying to protect Infinity and Clear Channel.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.