Sony/ATV Music Publishing has instructed the Harry Fox Agency today to stop all future licensing of any of the publisher's repertoire for streaming or limited downloads, Billboard.biz has learned.
The instruction is expected to impact services like RealNetwork's Rhapsody, Napster and MediaNet (formerly known as MusicNet). It also raises the question of whether a service that offers a stream or a limited download of any of the publisher's songs released on records after today would be intentionally infringing the publisher's copyrights.
Here's the link.
About Me
- Jeanine
- Born and raised in the Netherlands,now living in the USA. I am a full-time singer/songwriter/musician with my own band which may sound glamorous but mainly is a lot of fun and a lot of work :). Check out our band at www.offeringband.com.
3 comments:
Hoi Jeanine,
Een heel goed 2008 gewenst. May all your dreams come true!
Sony/ATV Music Publishing knows how to gut an industry. Instead of accepting fees for use of the songs in modern distribution, Sony/ATV wants to restrict musicians to mechanical license. I suspect musicians will get tired of this and start writing new material NOT published with Sony/ATV. Those new songs will be the music of the future. So, what has Sony/ATV gained? Maybe, a Darwin Award for its industry.
All this corporate B.S within the music industry is really disgusting. And I love this comment on “Mac user's paying for a significantly higher proportion of music content than PC user's”. I apologize if Ive taken this post out of context but it feels very bourgeois. To this end, I wonder if a predominant force at work here could actually be an economic factor within the trends of paying for music downloads? Honestly find a decent Mac computer for less than $1500 and you've got a deal. Myself however, I use PC as University student (Obviously not as financially strapped as people come), as it provides a fairly high functioning machine for a low cost, my roommate picked up a budget line, but functioning PC, today for $500. Therefore, it would appear that simply because you own a Mac youre not necessarily morally greater for paying for those song's, although it appears the diameter of youre wallet may be. Now, as a performance music major in University, I do hope someday people will pay to hear my music however, I would much rather people have open access to hear my content and perhaps pay to see a live performance or buy a t-shirt than never get to experience the art simply because their financial situation may not allow. There are avenues such as ticket sales, merchandise revenue, number of plays on TV and radio, ect where the artists are reimbursed for their creative works, and many enjoy a comfortable living. Issues such as downloading music is yet another way major corporations are trying to maintain current social divides by empowering those that can afford their fees. Art is universal and should be treated as such.
Post a Comment