News, info, and opinion by Mac users, for Mac users.

July 11, 2007

itunes

Dear MRT: You owe me a Tylenol. Sincerely, Kate

Posted Jul. 11, ’07, 10:30 AM PT by Kate Marshall
Category | iTunes

DockArt%20icon.jpgHere’s a belated birthday wish: for Media Rights Technologies to stop pestering companies who don’t use its product. Seriously, it’s just not funny anymore and while I will tolerate headaches caused by SEPTA, lack of caffeine, and sinus pressure, I will not tolerate maladies induced by pushy companies who’ve pulled this kind of stunt before. Yes, after tossing a Cease and Desist letter to Apple and others, MRT is now petitioning a Dr. James H. Billington—also known as the Librarian of Congress. MRT now wants Dr. Billington to, “revoke all statutory internet broadcasting licenses granted under Section 114 of U.S. Copyright law for webcasters who are in violation of that section by willfully distributing their content as an interactive service,” according to its press release.

Thus, we are back to the same old song-and-dance again:

These webcasters, including Yahoo, Clear Channel, iTunes, Napster, Rhapsody, MSN Music, Pandora, and Live 365, all enable the public to receive program transmissions that can be unlawfully recorded and deaggregated for purposes of redistribution. CEO Hank Risan, states: “Every broadcast delivered from these services can easily be stream-ripped by the public, downloaded to a user’s hard drive on a song by song basis and uploaded onto iPhones and P2P networks. This type of piracy is in clear violation of the performance rights granted to these distributors of copyrighted material under Section 114.

I swear, there have been X-Files episodes that made more sense than this mess.


5 Comments

Jim Coleman said:

What MRT is undertaking is long over due. There have been billions of dollars pirated from the Internet over the past few years. All of this could have been prevented with the use of MRT's technology. If you read the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and the other federal copyright laws you will see that it is very clear that MRT is on firm legal ground. In their investigation MRT has learned that neither Apple, MySpace, Yahoo and many other sites have never applied for broadcast licensing agreements from the Library of Congress. All of these companies are bootleggers. The mission statement for MRT says, "Save the Arts," and that is exactly what they intend to do by putting a stop to Internet piracy. MRT has the RIAA, Warner Brothers and Universal joined with them in this very important issue. Their petition to the Librarian of Congress is just another way of justifying the company's standing in court. This will be a huge case when it goes to federal court with damages in the range of a trillion dollars.

July 11, 2007 12:09 PM
Kelmon said:

...and if Apple (or the others) used MRT's technology then I could still record the music using a microphone if push came to shove. Where will this insanity end?

July 11, 2007 12:15 PM
Mike Park said:

Bring Yer Wellies!

Sorry, the Gaelic Storm album cover got me excited.

July 11, 2007 3:03 PM
Jon said:

It would be absurd if the DMCA legally trumps contacts between copyright owners and their distributors such as Apple/iTunes. It would be like protecting the rights of copyright owners by protecting them from themselves. Which would be an insane concept since that very action of interfering with the rights of copyright owners would, seemingly, be a violation of the DMCA.

And it's pointless anyways, as Apple is, in regards to iTunes...a distributor, not a music broadcaster. Except for those 30 second samples (contractually and legally agreed to by the music copyright owners [the labals]), Apple does not "broadcast" music. Nor does Apple "stream" music (except for the aforementioned 30 second samples). While a song is being downloading from iTunes it cannot be listened to, nor "stream ripped" as it is not being "streamed".

July 11, 2007 11:03 PM
Dave-O said:

@Jon, it's pretty clear this is about Internet Radio.

@Jim, Apple isn't broadcasting squat. This is the same as going after radio manufacturers for not protecting on-air broadcasts by other companies. Should one radio company start adding protection to an unprotected stream and send all its customers to the competition? If you apply protection to the broadcast or stream, you put the device manufacturers (or software providers) on even ground.

July 12, 2007 7:48 AM

Leave a comment

 



Visit other IDG sites: