179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

[idm] permission slips

3 messages · 3 participants · spans 1 day · search this subject
2002-06-24 21:40Lukas Bergstrom [idm] permission slips
└─ 2002-06-24 21:52dj pie Re: [idm] permission slips
2002-06-24 22:24Ken Re: [idm] permission slips
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
2002-06-24 21:40Lukas BergstromGood idea, Mizz Summer. First: does anyone know if this is how it works? Could Warp or For
From:
Lukas Bergstrom
To:
idm doesn't stand for anything
Date:
Mon, 24 Jun 2002 17:40:32 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:
[idm] permission slips
permalink · <Pine.BSF.4.30.0206241733400.95838-100000@peswar.pair.com>
Good idea, Mizz Summer. First: does anyone know if this is how it works? Could Warp or Force Inc just issue a blanket "our music can be freely webcast"? Or have they given some of their rights to negotiate this stuff to the RIAA somehow? I'd be interested to see pointers to responsible legal opinion on this. Either way, labels willing to have their stuff webcast would pretty much have a monopoly on net listeners. Ka-ching. Lukas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2002-06-24 21:52dj pieanother thing i would like to make sure of is that any and all such agreements (permission
From:
dj pie
To:
Lukas Bergstrom
Cc:
idm doesn't stand for anything
Date:
Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:52:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:
Re: [idm] permission slips
Reply to:
[idm] permission slips
permalink · <Pine.LNX.4.31L2.0206241451000.12530-100000@zot.electricrain.com>
another thing i would like to make sure of is that any and all such agreements (permission slips, contracts, authorizations, whatever) include specifically that this agreement includes any retroactive fees, since CARP specifies that broadcasters are also responsible for fees going back to 1998. -rachel (dj pie) piesarenice.net -- <marklar> I cried that I had no lever, until I met a man with no fulcrum. On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Lukas Bergstrom wrote:
quoted 12 lines Good idea, Mizz Summer.> Good idea, Mizz Summer. > > First: does anyone know if this is how it works? Could Warp or Force Inc > just issue a blanket "our music can be freely webcast"? Or have they > given some of their rights to negotiate this stuff to the RIAA somehow? > I'd be interested to see pointers to responsible legal opinion on this. > > Either way, labels willing to have their stuff webcast would pretty much > have a monopoly on net listeners. Ka-ching. > > Lukas >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
2002-06-24 22:24KenThe only part of the law I see as an out is this: <<(d) Notwithstanding the schedule of ra
From:
Ken
To:
dj pie
Cc:
Lukas Bergstrom , idm doesn't stand for anything
Date:
Mon, 24 Jun 2002 18:24:33 -0400
Subject:
Re: [idm] permission slips
permalink · <3.53772592544556.115.552178144455@1.00009722655711>
The only part of the law I see as an out is this: <<(d) Notwithstanding the schedule of rates and terms established in this part, the rates and terms of any license agreements entered into by Copyright Owners and services within the scope of 17 U.S.C. 112 and 114 concerning eligible nonsubscription transmissions shall apply in lieu of the rates and terms of this part.>> I still haven't fully swallowed this paragraph, but I take it to mean that an artist can enter into an agreement with a webcaster, to have rates and terms, and that agreement would supercede this new reg. BUT, I believe the webcaster still has to be able to prove what they played with proper records. I'm still not 100% clear on whether this subverts the RIAA as collector and distributor of said "rates." I'll say again: Read the regs for yourself: http://www.copyright.gov/carp/webcast_regs.html - Ken kenzo@free-music.com ken's last ever radio extravaganza http://free-music.com/ken/extrav/ At 02:52 PM 6/24/2002 -0700, dj pie wrote:
quoted 26 lines another thing i would like to make sure of is that any and>another thing i would like to make sure of is that any and >all such agreements (permission slips, contracts, authorizations, >whatever) include specifically that this agreement includes >any retroactive fees, since CARP specifies that broadcasters >are also responsible for fees going back to 1998. > >-rachel (dj pie) >piesarenice.net >-- ><marklar> I cried that I had no lever, until I met a man with no fulcrum. > > > >On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Lukas Bergstrom wrote: > > > Good idea, Mizz Summer. > > > > First: does anyone know if this is how it works? Could Warp or Force Inc > > just issue a blanket "our music can be freely webcast"? Or have they > > given some of their rights to negotiate this stuff to the RIAA somehow? > > I'd be interested to see pointers to responsible legal opinion on this. > > > > Either way, labels willing to have their stuff webcast would pretty much > > have a monopoly on net listeners. Ka-ching. > > > > Lukas
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org