Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act’

Help @RepJerryNadler Beat the Cartels because #irespectmusic

September 26, 2017 Comments off

Emmanuel Legrand posted a very informative piece in his newsletter about a speech by Rep. Jerry Nadler at the so-called “Music Biz Association” Music Biz Entertainment & Technology Law Conference Series in New York.

(Some of you may remember the “Music Biz Association” as NARM which is what it was called before it was taken over by representatives from the leading royalty deadbeats of our day: Facebook, Amazon, Spotify, YouTube and Pandora. In fact, the chair of the “Music Biz Association” is from Facebook, the industry leader in screwing artists out of royalties and their name and likeness rights, not to mention fake news.  YouTube parent Google and Pandora are both members of the MIC Coalition cartel that is an effort by Corporate America dedicated to screwing the world’s songwriters and artists through massive lobbying power.  Also known as The Anti-Music Biz Association.  Amazon and Spotify are also represented through their trade association the Digital Media Association which has opposed everything anyone has tried to do to better the lives of creators.)

Mr. Legrand tells us that Rep. Nadler noted the long list of critical creative industries legislation languishing in the Congress:  These include the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act (HR 1695) which is currently languishing in the Senate after having passed the House with a rip-roaring 378-48 after being opposed by proxies of Music Biz board members.  Nadler’s own Fair Play Fair Pay Act of 2017 (HR 1836) would close the terrestrial performance right loophole for sound recordings; [the CLASSICS Act (HR 3301) to get artists paid statutory performance royalties for pre-1972 recordings that The Turtles have had to sue over at great expense;] “…the Songwriters’ Equity Act, that would simplify the way music is licensed by performance rights organisations; [the Allocation for Producers (AMP Act HR 881); and] the PROMOTE Act of 2017 (HR 1914), which would allow performing artists to opt out of having their music played on the radio if the performing artist is not being paid an agreed-upon performance royalty.”

Let’s be clear about one thing–the real tragedy that would make us all look very stupid would be if after getting the Register of Copyrights bill passed overwhelmingly in the House–after dirty dealing by Representative from Google–the bill simply dies in the Senate because no one will bring it up for a vote or because Senator Wyden (D-Google Data Center) has a hold on it.  The one bill that actually got a vote and was passed by the Judiciary Committee and by the House–fails in the Senate?  

That result would no doubt be thrilling to the Music Biz Association board members from YouTube, Facebook, Amazon and Spotify if for no other reason that the snarky Librarian of Congress is very likely itching to appoint her own Register and give the gesture to the Congress and their little dog, too.  (This would be the Libraian of Congress who is permitting (and I think encouraging) mass NOIs to screw songwriters for the benefit of Amazon, Pandora, Spotify and Google.)

If that Register appointment bill doesn’t get a vote pretty soon, she just might do it, particularly if she got top cover from the MIC Coalition and the Internet Association (assuming the IA can take time away from their important work of protecting Backpage.com and saving the Internet).

And this is not to mention the latest atrocity from the MIC Coalition, the radioactive “Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act” (HR 3350).  That bill destroys statutory damages and attorneys fees awards in copyright infringement cases against special classes of members of the MIC Coalition cartel that appears to be attempting to fix songwriter and artist royalties–at zero by the look of it.  (And those Music Biz Association meetings should recite the antitrust prayer with special fervor given all of the interlocking boards involved and the dominant posistions of Facebook, Google, Spotify, Pandora and of course Amazon.  Someone might come looking.)  For a good summary of what’s wrong with HR 3350 (or as we call it, The Shiv Act) read this open letter by the Content Creators Coalition signed by artist members Melvin Gibbs, John McCrea, Tommy Manzi, Rosanne Cash, Tift Merritt and Matthew Montfort.

Since we’re not mentioning HR 3350, let’s also not mention Music Biz Association board members Amazon, Spotify, Pandora and Google’s millions upon millions of “address unknown” NOIs served on the Copyright Office pursuant to impenetrable filings that screw songwriters to the wall in no uncertain terms.  But wait…Spotify says there’s no such thing as a mechanical royalty….I’m so confused.

Mr. Legrand reports that Rep. Nadler is disheartened by the lack of effort behind these bills:

Nadler said that so far none of these bills have gathered any traction, aside from the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act, which was voted 27-1 by the Committee before the summer, to be then sent to the Senate where it is stalling.

Nadler added that Goodlatte will stay in his position for less than two more years so something has to happen this year, if anything.

“Time is the enemy,” said Nadler. “Someone has to be pushing and a lot of this stuff is not going through the Judiciary.” However, Nadler wondered whether Goodlatte would go for a comprehensive Copyright Bill that would become his legacy or opt for a selective number of individual bills.

Nadler, as one of the co-sponsors of the bill, would like to see [Fair Play Fair Pay] go through because, as he said, the USA is the only country alongside Iran and North Korea not to grant performance rights on sound recordings for music played on terrestrial radio. To explain he situation owners of sound recordings are facing at the moment, Nadler used the following image: “In a car you can hit three buttons. If you hit FM, music performers do not get royalties. If you then hit satellite radio, performers get a royalty, and if you then hit streaming, performers get a different royalty. It does not make sense.”

Rep. Nadler probably thought he was speaking to an organization that supported his efforts, and indeed in fairness many of the Music Biz Association members do.

However, at least four of the members of both the organization and its board of directors work for companies that have been actively trying to crush songwriters and artists for many, many years.  Pandora, for example, lead the charge against the retirees and the deceased on opposing paying Pandora’s fair share on pre-1972 royalties for sound recordings.  $300 million or so later, it is up to the Congress to fix this loophole.

It’s imporant to note that it takes two to tango–one reason this long list of bills hasn’t moved is because of efforts to stop each of them by companies on the Music Biz Association’s board or the lobbying groups these companies fund to avoid any breadcrumbs leading back to their house.  The MIC Coalition, for example, includes the National Association of Broadcasters who have used their lobbying power to crush artists for decades.

MIC Coaltion 8-15

And it’s not that these companies just oppose legislation to treat creators fairly, it’s that they have in large part formed the MIC Coalition cartel for that exact purpose.  These companies spend millions of dollars lobbying against our interests.  So while we cherish Rep. Nadler’s unflagging support for songwriters and artists (as evidenced by the #IRespectMusic campaign and Blake Morgan’s extraordinary advocacy, for example), it must be said that the Music Biz Association is probably the wrong place to open the kimono because you never know which royalty deadbeat is taking notes in the audience and yukking it up under their breath.

Want to do something about it?  Call your Member of Congress at (202) 224-3121 (or find them on this list for a direct line in the House) AND call both your Senators at (202) 224-3121 (or find them on this list for a direct line in the Senate).  You can also write to your Member by looking them up on the House of Representatives website or to your Senators by looking them up on the Senate website.  (Remember–you have one Member of Congress and two Senators.)

Let’s help our friends like Rep. Nadler defeat the cartels.  Make those phone calls.

IRMAIV Large

 

@KRSfow: Future of What Podcast on the Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act

September 16, 2017 Comments off

Episode #94: Recently, a bill was introduced by Republican congressman Jim Sensenbrenner which calls for the creation of a comprehensive database of compositions and recordings. The “Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act” claims to make things easier for coffee shops, bars and restaurants who want to license music to play in their establishments. To many in the music industry, the bill seems like a wolf in sheep’s clothing with the potential cause big problems. On this episode we dig deep into the bill with Future of Music Coalition’s Kevin Erickson and attorney Chris Castle.

Subscribe to The Future of What on iTunes: apple.co/1P4Apk0

Follow us:
Twitter: bit.ly/2gOYMYM
Facebook: www.facebook.com/thefutureofwhat/
Instagram: bit.ly/1L6T8fl

 

The Government’s Music Database: What Would Monk Do?

September 7, 2017 Comments off

There is a fundamental difference between people with experience in the vagaries of copyright chain of title research and those who want their data served up in nice neat–very, very neat–packages.  So neat that you could eat your lunch off of those packages–one pea at a time arranged in a straight line, preferably.

Those who do not step on cracks have an especially difficult time understanding that song data is a dynamic process best left to the people who…well, who don’t mind the cracks.

Explaining this to our friends in the tech community is kind of like explaining the interpretation of a blood test to…well, to Monk.

@RobertBLevine_: Federal ‘Transparency’ Bill Endangers Songwriters’ Leverage for Getting Paid

August 12, 2017 Comments off

On the surface, at least, the “Transparency in Music Licensing Ownership Act,” introduced in the House of Representatives on July 20 by Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), seems like a copyright bill that could help untangle the online music business….but the devil is in the details.

via @RobertBLevine_: Federal ‘Transparency’ Bill Endangers Songwriters’ Leverage for Getting Paid — Artist Rights Watch

@philouza: New Bill Calling For Transparency In Music Is Surprisingly Opaque — Artist Rights Watch

August 2, 2017 Comments off

NPR’s Andrew Flanagan on the controversial Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act (TIMLAOA).

via @philouza: New Bill Calling For Transparency In Music Is Surprisingly Opaque — Artist Rights Watch

Controversial Bill On Music Licensing Has Nothing to Do with Small Business

August 1, 2017 Comments off

I dreamed up a startling new technique to attempt to divine whether the true purpose of the controversial Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act (or…”TIMLOA”?)  was intended to protect small business as advertised by the MIC Coalition.  I determined that the safe harbors  in the Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act (or as it’s been called, The Shiv Act) was actually designed to protect the biggest of big business.

What startling new technique did I utilize?  I read the bill.

What you don’t find in the bill is anything that limits its application to small business.  Is it common in music licensing legislation to find such protections?  Absolutely.   This wasn’t what I expected to find given the braying of the Disco Ducks.  But then you know what they say…

The Fair Play Fair Pay Act, for example, has special protection in great specificity for small business like noncommercial broadcasters, public broadcasters and small broadcasters.

The Performance Rights Act (from the 110th Congress) also had very clear exemptions for small broadcasters.

While as a matter of propaganda it ignores these protections, the Local Radio Freedom Act (aka “The Pay Your Rent With Exposure Bucks Act”) is very clear about protecting a particular class of broadcasters: “local radio.”

Exposure Bucks

Yet none of this protective language appears in the Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act.  Why doesn’t the TIMLOA have such limiting language if it’s actually all about protecting small business?  Maybe because it’s not about small business at all?  Maybe it’s about these guys in the MIC Coalition:

mic-coaltion-8-15

Realize some MIC Coalition members are themselves trade associations for companies with combined market capitalizations over $1 trillion.  When you see logos for Digital Media Association, the CEA (now called the Consumer Technology Association) and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (home of the Disco Ducks) these are themselves made up of massive companies like Apple, Amazon, YouTube and of course Google, not to mention Spotify.  True small business can’t afford these lobbyists and PR firms (like the Glen Echo Group) this starts to look like the astroturf plant it really is.

So don’t let them tell you that the Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act  is about small business, unless the MIC Coalition would like to include the kind of protective language in their bill that our business has always included to protect the real small business.

 

Don’t Believe the Astroturf: Yet More Regulations Won’t Help Songwriters or Small Business — Music Tech Solutions

July 31, 2017 Comments off

By Chris Castle

“[Government] interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding.” James Madison, The Federalist Papers No. 44

There is a bill in Congress backed by the mega lobbying juggernaut called the MIC Coalition that would force songwriters and artists to “register” with the government in order to protect their rights from the biggest corporations in the world. Failing to do so would take away the stick of statutory damages and an award of attorneys fees to songwriters or artists who are victorious in copyright infringement litigation. Statutory damages and attorneys’ fees are the only real protection that the government gives these creators–the smallest of small businesses.

via Don’t Believe the Astroturf: Yet More Regulations Won’t Help Songwriters or Small Business — Music Tech Solutions

%d bloggers like this: