No one is asking when the Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act will be dropped, but in a way they don’t have to. Supporters of the bill (like the MIC Coaltion) get a lot of what they want in the Music Modernization Act–a Lessig-style registration requirement that is essentially an orphan works bill in disguise. Maybe that’s why they’re supporting the MMA.
It seems like every time I read the controversial Music Modernization Act (“MMA”) I run across a loose end or unintended consequence–and here’s another one. Many of us–myself included–argued for years that PROs like ASCAP, BMI, GMR and SESAC should be allowed to license both the performance right and the mechanical reproduction right for streaming […]
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 […]
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.
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 […]
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 […]
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
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 not small business as advertised.
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.
The Transparency in Music Licensing and Ownership Act perpetuates the myth of the “global rights database” that no one who understands the complexities believes will ever be created. It sounds logical, right? We have county recorders for real estate, the DMV for cars, why not a database for music?
That is an 11th century idea being welded onto a 21st century problem, the Domesday Book meets a unicorn.
Music Technology Policy 
You must be logged in to post a comment.