<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] NYTimes.com Article: With Cable TV at M.I.T., Who NeedsNapster?




From: Michael Carroll <carroll@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

No, the RIAA probably is not happy * although they should be. The whole point of the system is to use analog technology to avoid having to pay a performance royalty to the sound recording copyright owner. The traditional rationale that justified denying SRs a performance right was that radio play is free advertising so there's a net economic benefit from broadcasting to the SR copyright owner . (The real reason was the political power of broadcasters). In 1995, the digital performance right was justified on the grounds that digital technology would enable on-demand performances of sound recordings that would displace sales so the sound recording copyright owner needed direct compensation for the performance. If you buy that, then you would expect the RIAA to object since MIT's on-demand service has the same sales-displacement potential. Of course, the RIAA should be happy because the net economic effect is far more likely to be increased sales driven by the free advertising.

Best,
Mike
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/