This was an interesting case because ASCAP wants to charge twice essentially. I dunno. Music should be priced fairly and then you can do whatever you want with it. If you play it for an audience, then you should pay the fees associated. But ASCAP was trying to tack that fee on to downloads regardless of if it was actually played for audiences or not.
Supreme Court denies ASCAP claim downloads are performances:
The US Supreme Court late Monday rejected ASCAP’s attempt to claim that song downloads are public performances. Its verdict upheld an earlier appeal ruling without added comment. The earlier, federal-level judge pointed to basic logic for support, contending that a digital recording isn’t necessarily being played live to a wide audience just because it had been transferred over the Internet….
(Via Electronista | Gadgets for Geeks)
Another link for the same judgement here -> SCOTUS lets stand ruling that downloads are not performances
First, they went after the Girl Scouts to have them PAY for singing songs around a campfire. Now, ASCAP wants you to PAY for a public performance of a ring tone. Yes……my mind too hit the brick wall and splattered upon reading this too. Have we become THAT concerned with money? I think it is fair game to require people who are MAKING money performing an ASCAP song to be required to share some of the revenues. But Girl Scouts? Cell Phone “performances”? Seriously?
Jazz-Sax, all things Jazz and Sax