Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: Ringtones, ASCAP, Royalties, Music, Mobile | Themes: The Internet, Smartphones
Looks like carriers won't need to pay royalties every time your cell phone plays a ringtone.
A federal court has ruled against the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) in the ringtone argument, stating that cell phone providers do not have to pay royalties for each time a ringtone is used. U.S. District Judge Denise Cote said that playing the ringtones aloud in public areas does not infringe on the content owners' copyrights, as they are not true performances.
According to Ars Technica, ASCAP sued certain carriers earlier this year, forcing them to pay royalties every time a customer's ringtone is played. However the judge dismissed that idea in her ruling, explaining that carriers have no way to control when a ringtone is being played, and earns no revenue when it happens. Customers also decide when and where their phones can ring, and when the phone is turned on or off, not the carrier.
Judge Cote also added that the carrier is responsible for the transmission of the song to the phone, and doesn't count as a performance. She defined "performance" as working publicly in a space where "a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of its social acquaintances is gathered."
The Electronic Frontier Foundation said that the ruling should also protect people who play the radio on the beach or sing "Happy Birthday" to children in a public park."The ruling is an important victory for consumers, making it clear that playing music in public, when done without any commercial purpose, does not infringe copyright," the organization said.
-
Previous News Article
Colorado Boy Stuck in Hot Air... -
Next News Article
Google Launching Online Bookstore
This must be what they call a miracle.. RIAA must of crapped their pants..
Ummm... this won't stand very long...
Ummm... this won't stand very long...
We'll see. I think a second ruling to determine the limit between this ruling and where the laws take effect is in the future. Anyone want to volunteer? Go to a park, call attention to yourself, play a ring tone, collect tips.
Someone needs to get this judge to the Supreme Court. She actually has some common sense!
Anyone else pronouncing ASCAP as as(s) cap?
Ummm... this won't stand very long...
Why?
I am amazed, my head almost exploded when I heard about the initial suit... There is hope for us yet.
holy cow, someone with some practical sense exists in our legal system...
And then the music industry wonders why we hate them so much.........
Ummm... this won't stand very long...
Why?
The members of RIAA & MPAA are 1) greedy, 2) essentially are monopolies (well, oligopolies) 3) have enough money to buy a favorable position. They'll see the writing on the wall, and come to the aid of ASCAP. That's not to say that the actual artists (including composers & performers) get any out of any outcome.
A Federal Court Ruling on rights THAT MAKES SENSE!!!!NO WAY!!!
Finally, a judge with common sense.
Cell phone carriers are just as greedy, if not more so. Therefore, I get no satisfaction out of this ruling either way. I'd like some sort of federal regulation on the cell phone carriers' fleecing of their customers.
Our legal system did something that made sense....?
....
....
....
!!!!
TO THE APOCALYPTIC BUNKER!!!!
Such a greedy bunch of people! Next time all music instruments (guitars, pianos, drums..) being sold have to pay royalties, all ipods and zunes and nokias have to pay royalties, all kenwoods and pioneers have to pay royalties, all bose and whatever have to pay royalties?
I thought I heard someone humming a copyrighted song today - surely they should be paying royalties to RIAA.
if they were responsible then every radio station would have to calculate estimated listeners and then estimate public playing of said radio station and pay royalties on that. The ASCAP and RIAA are truly reaching for straws and hopefully the pirates continue their trend (sorry Metallica and other artist counting on every penny they can get from their record label) and bankrupt all major record label. Then we can finally get to a true internet based recording industry where the artist actually collects 90% of the royalties they deserve instead of only collecting 10%... Pirates are actually fighting (inadvertently) for the artist rights and profits!
Hmmm... Actually radio stations do pay royalties allready...
Cell phone carriers are just as greedy, if not more so. Therefore, I get no satisfaction out of this ruling either way. I'd like some sort of federal regulation on the cell phone carriers' fleecing of their customers.
Oh god no... Regulation drives prices up, not down. Removing regulations makes them fight it out with much harsher people than the government... it's consumers. If the government stops protecting these companies, they'll have to compete with one another.
Competition = Good, Government = not so much.
This case is not over. I am sure it will go to the Federal court of appeals to be argued again in a higher court. This could easily be overturned (I don't think it will)and the fight is not over.
Oh god no... Regulation drives prices up, not down. Removing regulations makes them fight it out with much harsher people than the government... it's consumers. If the government stops protecting these companies, they'll have to compete with one another.Competition = Good, Government = not so much.
Deregulation is not always a good thing. Look at the deregulation of oil and what it has done to drive prices up. Ever heard of Enron? They pushed for deregulation and screwed a bunch of people when natural gas was deregulated. Regulations are imposed to protect small businesses so it can be competitive with a much larger organization which benefits the consumer.
while I tend to agree w/you Maxor, this isn't always the case. Part of the bank failures that led to our current financial crisis occurred because of not enough regulations. We figured the banks would be smart enough not to over leverage their capital and we were dead wrong. In a non truly competitive mkt. a.k.a. areas extremely high barriers to entry & strong oligopolies (music, cable, power, cell phone companies) regulation actually helps. Another ex. is TX power companies -- they were deregulated and yearly % price increases have gone UP not down (even after adjusting for higher fuel prices). Regulation prevents cheating & collusion in markets which creates unfair advantages.
Oh great. So how much will the price of ringtones go down by? (yeah right)
The ruling made sense for a change.
Oh god no... Regulation drives prices up, not down. Removing regulations makes them fight it out with much harsher people than the government... it's consumers. If the government stops protecting these companies, they'll have to compete with one another.Competition = Good, Government = not so much.
Deregulation is not always a good thing. Look at the deregulation of oil and what it has done to drive prices up. Ever heard of Enron? They pushed for deregulation and screwed a bunch of people when natural gas was deregulated. Regulations are imposed to protect small businesses so it can be competitive with a much larger organization which benefits the consumer.
You're both at each end of the topic. Regulation isn't necessary where perfect competition exists but we all know there is no such think as 'perfect competition' so regulations are needed where a lack of competition is prevalent. Too much regulation (or regulating something that doesn't need it) is also undesirable as it can hamper economic growth and distort efficiency.
PS. Cappster, you're dead-on in regards to the US Banks/FI comment.
while I tend to agree w/you Maxor, this isn't always the case. Part of the bank failures that led to our current financial crisis occurred because of not enough regulations. We figured the banks would be smart enough not to over leverage their capital and we were dead wrong. In a non truly competitive mkt. a.k.a. areas extremely high barriers to entry & strong oligopolies (music, cable, power, cell phone companies) regulation actually helps. Another ex. is TX power companies -- they were deregulated and yearly % price increases have gone UP not down (even after adjusting for higher fuel prices). Regulation prevents cheating & collusion in markets which creates unfair advantages.
+1
I've very glad to see a positive consumer ruling. It seems like consumers rights in the arena of intellectual property have been sharply declining since the passage of that piece of crap legislation known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
The royalties 'if any' can only be factored into the price of the ring tone. Since many people buy multiple ring tones some of which don't even come from the carrier but from other sources.
The whole idea of enforcing a per ring royalty fee is ludicrous, how would the carrier know which ring tone is being used at any time? , without invading privacy anymore than they do already.
This was all about greed, and a pretty ill thought out case I'm not surprised it got thrown out.
Whats next? being charged per play for playing music you bought in your own house.
Hmmm... Actually radio stations do pay royalties allready...
If a radio station plays a song, it goes into the log and the royalty money eventually goes to the right place. They don't need to know if anybody actually heard the song. Public performance fees would (in theory) require that the number of listeners be known, and the reason for them listening would involve a for-profit event. Normal use of a radio would not invoke these extra fees.
Playing a radio in a show store, for example, would require fees. Getting away with it for a while doesn't mean the fees don't apply...
You're right. We need less, not more, government interference in businesses. Competition and capitalism are the way to go -- China's doing it and look how well that's paying off. All the more reason to not vote Democrat now. And I'm not saying the Republicans are really any better either, but the Democrats are definitely the "evil" between the two.
ASCAP FAIL