Songsmiths sue US antitrust over Google-friendly rules ruling Two independent women songwriters are suing the US antitrust department of the Department of Justice over its proposal to rip up songwriters' contracts to make them more Google-friendly. Crucially, in the remarks, the DoJ proposes that both ASCAP and BMI must accept 100 per cent licensing – so Spotify and other giant music …
Here's the shorter version.
Lynch's minion should have recused herself due to her past work for the companies involved.
That said, this case should move forward and will most likely end up in the Supreme Court.
Yet another overreach by Obama's Administration. If Clinton wins... expect more of this and things to get worse. Trump? Now that's a wild card but I suspect he'd walk things back to more normal and rational thoughts.
"Short version : it's fucked by corporate interests.
You can say that about most of the American judicial system as well."
And politics, diplomacy, military, healthcare, education, media/journalism. Even religion. This has been true for decades, but at this point it's basically a failed state in many ways.
I'm not holding my breath for a revolution, but the rest of the planet can damn well stop following their "lead".
Canada and it's elite, likely all ruling classes in all countries, do not want to stop following. They are envious of the American system and how it is easily manipulated to benefit those interests with the most money and power.
They, our elite, have taken note at how the American system has changed over the last few years. Now the President of the USA can drone kill American citizens he/she and his/her committee's have determined are a threat unworthy of due process. Now the wealthy can now access tax monies directly to cover their gambling debts and voters are increasingly lied to, mislead, and manipulated by petty politics and simply throwing fuel on age old racial conflicts.
The World does not want to stop, they want to adopt and use what is now acceptable in the USA, the leader of the "free" world.
What's good for Google is good for America.
They paid for the President so it's only fair that they get to call the tune.
What's good for America tends to be rather bad for the rest of the planet, so (following your reasoning all the way back) it means we must guard against anything that's good for Google.
But we knew that already..
In the music world the songwriters and performers are the ones at the end of the soup line. When a radio station plays a song, they get the left over crumbs. When you buy that song for $1.00 through some service (there are many), the responsible people (songwriters, performers) might get three cents (if they are lucky). The producer (who fronted the artists the money to stay alive) may not see anything. The rest of the money which used to be distributed up the music food chain, now gets to line those music services who release a compressed version of what used to be a full fidelity song.
And we wonder why the music industry is going down hill. There just isn't any money in the food chain to get good productions off the ground.
Whatever happens, I wish them good luck. They will need it.
Except... The music industry is looking robustly healthy. The artists are a mixed story. Those still participating in it are more screwed than ever, those outside it are doing better than the nothing they had before.
Andrew would do better agitating to reform the whole system instead of picking villains challenging the status quo. Too agitated to see the evil in front of his nose.
@Paul Shirley
Calling out one problem doesn't mean that the others can be ignored. I think, as a journalist, Andrew may be more interested in and aware of the copyright side of things and so more 'qualified' to discuss it.
How thing have reached this point is worth discussing and it is certainly not just Google's doing. Indeed Andrew touches on this with his explanation of how radio has 'helped' shape this current landscape.
When it comes down to it, however, the problem really starts with artists being at the mercy of labels and being forced to sign un-fair contracts to get their music out there.
You have a couple of things going on...
First, with the digital age, the old way of doing business isn't going to work.
Artists tend to make most of their money in live performances.
With respect to Google, they want to be able to use content so that they can sell adverts and print money.
They did this with out of print books but still within the author's copyright period.
Songs, videos... they don't care and only want to print money....
No longer a dripping tap of file sharers denying copyright holders a reasonable rate of return, now the leak is coming directly from the water treatment works!
Looks as though to combat this (because GOGGLE owns the US Justice Department) our musicians are going to have to pick up their Lutes don their finest garb wear their shiniest bells and go back to performing for the public, directly in public and hope that their musical stylings tickle the fancy of the gathered ladies and gentlemen who will reward them with a few groats in their hat......which i believe is still better than wot GOGGLE pay.
Please Andrew, don't act like this is new with Obama. Every administration has done that since long before either of us were born. Bush appointed oil industry friendly types to head the EPA and DOE, liberals were unhappy but that's his right and his party's right for holding the office just as it was Obama's right, and will be Clinton or Trump's right next year. Those cabinet positions are an extension of executive power, and letting the executive pick the cabinet is what allows him or her to create policy.
Not saying that what Google is trying to do to the songwriters is right though - what Spotify does to them when Google and others aren't able to isn't right either but the fix is to stop Spotify from doing it not to allow Google to do it too!
Is it real grassroots or astro turf?
It gets very tedious trying to discover if (US especially) "grassroots" movements are genuine or just a front funded by other interests (plenty of supposed "grassroots" funded by big tobacco, fossil fuel companies etc. over the years)
Would be useful if had a rating on how genuine a "grassroots" group was in articles.
The groups representing the artists are composed mostly of corrupt and greedy lawyers and equally corrupt and greedy politicians who rob both party's the artists as well as the public and keep all the money for themselves. It is far past time for these parasites to be removed from the progress and rapidly changing development of the music industry. The recent box office records were exclusively the artists decision. Google was merely their tool of choice. These people, (for greed only), are disrupting the entire , massive stagnated industry. As a concerned music aficionado PLEASE make these greedy parasites go away.
" The so-called “100 per cent licensing” proposal ensnares not just US songwriters, but British authors and composers too."
Surely if British authors and composers are caught by this, then they cannot be bound by any other commitments with the UK-based or EU-based rights agencies then? Either the rights are owned / represented by one, or the other - the US does not control the world, much as it behaves as though it should - or did I miss that election, we voted like lemmings to leave the EU and jumped to being the 51st State?
"... a state [Texas] where songwriters are popular heroes."
Only when their songs are about guns and people who need kkllin'.
With the possible exception of Roy Orbison.
The only solution is to abolish the concept of intellectual property alltogether. The matters are so complex, there is no balance possible. Nor is one required: people today have enough free time, there will still be more than enough production of "innovation" without any protection. With the upcoming robotization, 99% will be out of job anyways.
The only laws that must be retained in the area of intellectual property (I shudder at the term, as know how should be shared, not kept for oneself in a perfect world), are trademarks: The people must have transparancy over what they buy, and not be mislead by companies/products selling fake products.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
