BMI Sues T-Mobile, Claims It Needs To Pay Up Over Ringback Tones

from the are-ringbacks-a-public-performance? dept

I'm still in the camp of folks who doesn't quite understand "ringback tones" -- the ugly stepchild of ringtones, where it's not what music your phone plays, but what music a caller hears when they call you and are waiting for you to pick up. While ringbacks have been a big deal in Asia, they're still a relatively small market in the US. But, that's not going to stop collections societies from demanding cash, of course. mike allen alerts us to the news that BMI has sued T-Mobile over its ringback tones. Of course, here's the thing: a court has already established that ringtones are not performances, so are ringback tones performances? Or, of course, T-Mobile could just ban the use of any BMI songs as ringbacks, and then see how those artists feel about how BMI is "protecting" their interests...

Filed Under: performance, ringback tones, ringtones
Companies: bmi, t-mobile

Reason To Have A Distinct Ringtone? So You Can Find Your Mobile Phone At The Dump

from the that's-not-my-normal-ringtone dept

A guy in Aspen accidentally dropped his mobile phone into the piles of leaves he was raking up, and scooped up the phone and sent it off to the dump... But, amazingly, he was reunited with the phone by calling it and hearing it ring in the piles and piles of recyclables. Apparently, it took about half an hour of dialing/listening/sifting. Of course, there are times when you wonder if it wouldn't just be smarter to go get another phone...

Filed Under: garbage dump, ringtones

Sorry ASCAP, A Ringtone Is Not A Public Performance

from the nice-try-though dept

ASCAP and BMI have been pushing all sorts of ridiculous claims over the past few months, trying to squeeze extra money out of pretty much everything, rather than actually doing right by those they represent and helping them adapt new business models based on giving people a reason to buy. Beyond claiming that Congress should make sure their royalties never decrease, they've also been saying they deserve money for things like YouTube embeds (even though YouTube already pays them for that same traffic) and the 30 second previews on iTunes and other music stores. However, the most ridiculous of all was trying to claim that ringtones are a public performance, and thus mobile phone providers need to pay ASCAP/BMI. The thing is, ASCAP and BMI already get paid for ringtone purchases -- but this was an attempt to get a second payment on top of that for the fact that people might hear the ringtones.

Thankfully (as a whole bunch of you have sent in), a judge wasted little time totally rejecting that reasoning. The court pointed out that the Copyright Act is pretty clear that there's no royalty needed for any sort of "performance" that isn't done for commercial advantage and "customers do not play ringtones with any expectation of profit." It's a pretty complete rejection of an obvious stretch by ASCAP.

We might hope that ASCAP will take this and begin to recognize that the best way to serve songwriters is helping them embrace new business models, but we expect that instead they'll keep looking to squeeze more money and double dip from other providers... while continuing to pay industry insiders to smear those who want to protect consumer rights.

Filed Under: copyright, double dipping, public performance, ringtones, songwriters
Companies: ascap, bmi, eff

ASCAP Now Claiming That Your Mobile Phone Ringing Is A Public Performance

from the pay-up dept

Ah, those collection societies just never learn, do they? We've discussed in the past how ASCAP once threatened the Girl Scouts for singing songs around the campfire, but in the past few years it's been ASCAP's counterpart in the UK that's been in the news the most for things like threatening small business owners after calling them on the phone and saying they hear music in the background or threatening a stable owner for playing the radio to her horses. I guess ASCAP was feeling a bit left out. Its latest move is to claim that legally purchased ringtones on mobiles phones, playing in public places, represents a public performance for which it is owed royalties. Songwriters and music publishers already are paid royalties on ringtone purchases, but ASCAP is claiming that buying the file is entirely different than "the performance" (i.e., the phone ringing).

In the EFF's response to ASCAP, it notes that copyright law makes a specific exemption for performances made "without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage." ASCAP counters that even if that's true, only the owners of mobile phones can make that assertion, but the mobile operators (AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc.) still need to pay up for performance rights because they are commercial entities, even if the use of the phones is not. The EFF goes on to point out how this reasoning does not mesh with the law, the case law, or the intended purpose of copyright.

On top of this, even if, in some bizarre, twisted interpretation of the law, a ringtone playing on a phone was a public performance, how would it be the mobile operators' liability to pay? That would be like saying that Apple should pay ASCAP royalties because songs it sells on iTunes could potentially be played through speakers publicly somewhere. Perhaps I shouldn't be giving ASCAP ideas...

However, this is not a surprise. It's simply the way industry groups (even those representing the songwriters, rather than the labels) have always worked. It's always about "extending" rights. That's why copyright was broken down eventually into different types of rights -- including distribution rights and performance rights, because the "old" rights didn't fit the new technologies. It's a particularly obnoxious trick to claim that, because a single file can be used in multiple ways (for both distribution and performance), it is now subject to both types of royalties. The only reason those separate royalties were broken out in the first place was due to angry demands from these sorts of groups about how the old "rights" didn't cover new media versions of content. To then double back and claim multiple coverage is beyond obnoxious.

Filed Under: copyright, music, public performance, ringtones
Companies: ascap

Woman Sues Google Because Of Scammy Advertiser

from the steve-dallas-lawsuit dept

We've discussed in the past the concept of the "Steve Dallas lawsuit," named after an old Bloom County comic, where the lawyer character Steve Dallas gets beaten up by Sean Penn after trying to take a photo of him. In the comic, Dallas decides to sue Nikon, the maker of the camera, and explains that you always target the company with the most money rather than anyone actually responsible for the situation you're in. That seems to be happening again, as a woman is now suing Google because an ad on Google pointed her to a scammy ringtone provider, who did not clearly indicate what the ringtone would cost. The woman's lawyer is trying to turn this into a class action lawsuit against Google, claiming that it failed to live up to its advertising policies, which forbid ads from companies that don't clearly indicate their fees. It seems rather ridiculous to think that if any scammy company happens to get its ads on Google, that Google is somehow liable. And, yes, while some of those ringtone services may be less-than-honest in how they present their services, why not just protest the charges or (if you really must file a lawsuit) sue the ringtone company?

Filed Under: lawsuits, liability, ringtones, steve dallas
Companies: google

Ringtone Sales Falling As People Realize They Don't Need To Pay Twice

from the took-'em-this-long? dept

I have to admit that about the only surprising thing in the news last week from BMI that ringtone sales are likely to drop this year is the fact that it took this long. Since 2004 we've been wondering when people would get around to realizing that just because a ringtone is on a phone, it doesn't change the basic economics (which are even worse, as the industry kept trying to push the price of ringtones higher to "save" the industry). With users finally realizing that they can transfer songs they have elsewhere onto their phones as ringtones, the desire to pay huge fees just to prop up the recording industry just isn't going to work any more. No wonder the industry is now jumping on the music tax plan.

Filed Under: economics, music, ringtones

The 'Ringle,' Or What Passes For Innovation In The Recording Industry

from the something-else-you-won't-want dept

It's no secret that the record labels face a chronic inability to innovate in their business models, choosing instead to continually repackage content and seek ways to force people to buy stuff they don't want in order to get the things they do want. It's this sort of thinking which has brought about the "ringle": a combination of a single and ringtone, and apparently Sony BMG and Universal Music's latest strategy masterstroke. Buyers would get a CD with the full-length track, a B-side or two, and a ringtone for $6-7 -- which doesn't really compare favorably to a 99-cent download and a few bucks for a ringtone (or a download and free homemade ringtone). Is there any real benefit for the consumer here? It's hard to see any, but that's not really surprising. It seems more like an attempt by the record labels to try and deter people from buying single-track downloads, since they don't like the low price and the way they've blown up the album sales model -- which itself is another variation of the "buy stuff you don't want to get the stuff you do" model. It's unlikely that many consumers will fall for it, especially since the CD single is pretty much a dead format. It's probably also worth pointing out that just like the labels try to recycle content, they recycle their innovative ideas as well, since it would appear that Universal tried pretty much the exact same thing in 2004, just calling it the Pocket CD instead of the ringle.

Filed Under: music, music downloads, recording industry, ringtones
Companies: sony, sony bmg, universal music