similar to: DMCA and webcasting

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Jack Moffitt wrote: > > ================================================================== > > hey josh, > > i talked to [faculty advisor] today and was told we must stop our online > > streaming. reasons for this rash decision involve around a new law that > > was put in place over the summer saying that stations who broadcast online > >

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Joshua Vickery wrote: > Great, so should we file with SoundExchange or wait for the RIAA to pick > a rate? Yes, you are supposed to file with the RIAA (SE as you suggest?). Period, end of story. Jwz covers this on his site IIRC. > Even if they insisted on collecting $0.004 per performance I don't think > we have even 100000 "performances" a

> Everything that I've come across and it is my understanding is that > traditional radio stations are not exempt if they broadcast via the > web. In short, the RIAA and the labels it represents are greedy > individuals and will take their money whereever they can get it. If the > money is green they want it. Great, so should we file with SoundExchange or wait for the RIAA to

Basically, to legally broadcast music you must: A) Obtain permissions from the copyright holder (usually the publisher, record label) of the *composition*. ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC offer compulsory licenses for all of the artists they represent, fees based upon roughly how many listeners your station has & how many songs in your broadcast are by artists/composers they represent. B) Obtain

Forewarning... this is my understanding and advice. I am not a lawyer. First off, Jamie Zawinski has an article about this here: http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html > ================================================================== > hey josh, > i talked to [faculty advisor] today and was told we must stop our online > streaming. reasons for this rash decision

Greetings! I've been asked to set-up an Icecast stream / live webcam for a small club, and I'm worried about what kind of payments the owner would have to make to stream the club's music over the internet. I found this article: <http://www.copyright.gov/carp/webcasting_rates_final.html> but I still don't know what to make of it. Would we have to pay $0.07 per song the DJ

> performances. That's ~125,000 performances a year, which equates to about > $180,000. > > Significantly higher than the Frauhofer license, unless you generate > $9Mil/yr or more in revenue from your stream. The rates are in arbitration, and I doubt they will come out anywhere near that amount. It just isn't feasible, even for large companies. Reember, tradidional

> >So uh, you think it's worth more for mp3, than the actual music > >involved? > > > >Come on. > > Hmm.. so what you're saying is that for under $2K I can get an unlimited > distribution license from the recording industry? To burn, distribute, > sell and market as much of their material as I like? Wow. Sign me up. Streaming music is $250

Oh, I almost forgot... If you're going under compulsory licensing: 1) Listener requests cannot be honored, otherwise you will end up labeled an "interactive service" along with Audiogalaxy Rhapsody & the like. Which means more & more expensive royalties. 2) You cannot play more than 3 songs of the same album in any 3 hour period (no more than 2 in a row). Nor can you

Hi list, This might not be the right list to bring this subject up on, however I thought it might be a good place to start. What are the current legalities in relation to non commercial music streams, or more accurately put non profit streams, and is this currently being seriously policed? Basically I am wanting to start up my own online station, but I don't really want to get my butt

Is the new NIN Ghosts music (free download) safe for MOH? Justin ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hmmm, so in summary, anyone wanting to put together a station for a couple of hundred listeners with out a massive bank account, it can not be done legally. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris G (Moguta)" <chrisg1@umbc.edu> To: "icecast" <icecast@xiph.org> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:33 AM Subject: RE: [icecast] legalities of streaming <p>>

Hi gang, In 500 words or less (if possible), please explain what is a legal music-on-hold file? My boss hates the stuff provided with the distribution and I figure that I'm asking for trouble if I take my Les Mis tracks and run them through Audacity and SOX to make new files. Thanks in advance Danny Nicholas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

> On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 23:52, Mihail Egorov wrote: > > 1. How can I identify disconnect due to low <queue-size>. Suppose, I have > > enabled loglevel=4 (debug). Suppose, I have network jam. What shall I see at > > error.log? > > There is a log message that signifies the removal of a listener for > being too slow and that is > "Client has fallen too far

> I found this article: > > <http://www.copyright.gov/carp/webcasting_rates_final.html> > > but I still don't know what to make of it. Would we > have to pay $0.07 per song the DJ played? How about a > live performance with all original material? Also see: http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/webcasting.html I'm not sure what the rates are, but essentially

Hi, Is there any Royalty one needs to pay when using the inbuilt exisimg asterisk on hold music or when using any other mp3 from a music album. I think we need to pay for the later, but I am not sure if we need to pay for the inbuilt asterisk(freepbx) on hold music. -- Deepak --------------------------------- Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who

This is a mail in response to streamripper being threatened by legal action from Live365. The DMCA strikes again. jack. ----- Forwarded message from Fred von Lohmann <fred@vonlohmann.com> ----- Delivered-To: jack@localhost.cantcode.com Delivered-To: jack@icecast.org X-Authentication-Warning: penguin.onehouse.com: majordomo set sender to owner-pho@onehouse.com using -f X-Sent: 31 May 2001

Ditto Scott - you nailed it !! But the DMCA actually sets rules on requests and processing them without being considered "interactive" - for instance the time frame allowed from when requests are made and then processed and actually air (minimum 60 minutes), to displaying your playlist - (can not be displayed public in the order of actual performance) basically as long as you never

On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Jack Moffitt wrote: > > Anyone (Jack?) see the story on /. yesterday about the webcasting rates? > > Won't that kill all Internet radio under a huge burden of cost? > > Are you saying it wasn't already dying? :) > > Those are set in stone, but similar rates and terms probably soon will > be. Remember, they are retroactive to 1998 or so.

On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:52:38PM +0200, Jack Moffitt wrote: > > Does it matter if the stream is mp3 or ogg? > > No. It could be WAV, FLAC, or some 2-bit per sample mono format where > the music is unrecognizable. You'd still have to pay the royalties. It DOES matter if it's mp3. You have to pay the publisher royalties regardless, but in addition, there's a 2%