I think the argument goes to the commercialization of the work they do and the perception that they are out licensing their stuff for money. The rub is that a compulsory license is ... compulsory and can't be withheld by the copyright holder. However, the license procedures still need to be followed.
Just because BMG knows how to obtain a license doesn't mean they do it every time. In this case, they tried to get one through GEMA, that failed. They didn't get the Compulsory Mechanical License (the requirements are laid out by statute), so they released without a license and didn't cure within the statutory 30 day period. So, that's copyright infringement.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Mr.Owl.
Re: Reputational damage?
I think the argument goes to the commercialization of the work they do and the perception that they are out licensing their stuff for money. The rub is that a compulsory license is ... compulsory and can't be withheld by the copyright holder. However, the license procedures still need to be followed.
Re: Re: Re: I don't get it.
The statue does not require the release to be "commercial". Just that a performance was released.
Re:
Just because BMG knows how to obtain a license doesn't mean they do it every time. In this case, they tried to get one through GEMA, that failed. They didn't get the Compulsory Mechanical License (the requirements are laid out by statute), so they released without a license and didn't cure within the statutory 30 day period. So, that's copyright infringement.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Mr.Owl.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt