Samsung appears to have had a change of heart on whether to charge for its Milk Music service in South Korea. Today, the tech giant announced that it would introduce a premium tier to Milk following some legal trouble with a group of Korean record labels. According to Korea Bizwire, the paid plan will arrive in Samsung’s home country in the first quarter of 2015. Continue Reading
YouTube has made $1 billion in payouts from its ContentID system since it was implemented in 2007. This technology helps many of the video network’s content creators to control how their material is made available. The program has been especially helpful for musicians and music labels, since many YouTube users upload video with copyrighted audio material. The rights holders can either have infringing videos taken down or have ads placed in them to generate revenue. Continue Reading
Samsung has drawn the ire of the Korea Music Copyright Association with its Milk Music. The group of record labels signed a contract with Samsung stating that the tech major would begin charging for the streaming service starting Oct. 10. Samsung is still offering Milk for free to the owners of certain smartphones, but it is paying the streaming charges to Soribada, a subcontractor and local music distributor. The association ended its contract with Soribada today as a result, claiming that continuing to operate Milk Music without its approval would be a copyright infringement. Continue Reading
College radio stations, represented by College Broadcasters, Inc. (CBI), will see their webcast royalty rates for the use of music recordings unchanged in the looming 2016-2020 royalty period. Most stations will use a simplified “proxy” reporting method to SoundExchange, an easier administrative process than the fastidious reporting that commercial stations must supply. Continue Reading
Webcast companies have filed written arguments with the Copyright Royalty Board, as the streaming industry moves inexorably toward a new licensing period for the use of music recordings starting in 2016. The filing deadline was last night at midnight.
The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) and SoundExchange have both filed their documents. The two petitions use some of the same language, but to opposite purposes. We examine both arguments. Continue Reading
Brief news items and worthy reads from around the Internet: Prince criticizes U2; do lawsuits for pre-1972 royalties threaten digital music?; Spotify’s semi-secret info sessions; what’s up at The Echo Nest. Continue Reading
The Turtles have filed a class-action suit against Pandora, claiming $25 million in damages for copyright infringement. The New York Times reported that pre-1972 songs only account for about 5% of the music played on Pandora. A representative from the online radio company said that the platform was confident in its actions, noting that Pandora pays separate songwriting royalties on all its music, including those tunes from before the pivotal dates. Continue Reading
Following the recent copyright ruling in favor of The Turtles, Sirius XM said it will appeal the decision. “We think Judge Gutierrez is wrong,” Sirius CFO David Frear said at a conference this week. “We’ve been observing the law since we started service.” Frear said that the pre-1972 ruling has much broader implications than for just the satellite radio company. Continue Reading
Grooveshark received some damning news from a New York district court judge yesterday, but it is still trying to swim on. Today the streaming and uploading service shared a blog post with a response to the ruling. “This latest news dealt specifically with an early version of Grooveshark which we dispensed of in 2008 in favor of our current music streaming service,” the company said. Continue Reading
It seems yesterday’s news was just the tip of the iceberg in Grooveshark’s copyright woes. Today, a district court judge ruled that Grooveshark is liable for copyright infringement because its employees uploaded tracks without the labels’ permission. The judge determined that these uploads were not protected by the DCMA safe harbor provisions. Continue Reading
Sirius XM was on the receiving end of some bad copyright news last week, and this week the recipient is Grooveshark. Universal Music Group is pushing for a summary judgment, claiming that it is the owner of pre-1972 recordings played on the streaming service. Since Grooveshark’s users are the ones uploading content and since labels can issue takedown notices, the platform has argued that it is covered by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s safe harbors and thus is not liable for infringement. Universal is arguing that this provision should not apply to the music dating before 1972. Continue Reading
“This is a very surprising decision,” writes broadcast attorney David Oxenford in this comprehensive analysis of a federal court ruling in California. Looking forward, much depends on whether the surprising decision is upheld in appeal, and whather it is replicated in other courtrooms and states. “If this decision were upheld, the potential ramifications for business in California could be great.” Oxenford, who wrote about “The Summer of Copyright” this year, declares the start of what could be an equally contentious new season — “The Autumn of Copyright has begun!” Continue Reading