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
I just picked up a copy of Tim Ries “The Rolling Stones Project”. I have to say, this is probably the best CD I’ve bought in 2005. I can’t think of another CD that I bought in 2005 that was better. Seriously, I think the industry needs to stop doing American Idol and other cheese things, and get back to producing good music.
On the Worst side, the RIAA lawsuits. Here is a great clip of a CNN interview with a person being sued and the RIAA head. Wow, talking about blinking. And here is another guy challenging the suits. I think if an album is good, and reasonably priced, people will buy it (HINT: Around $10). Also, a potential problem for the Recording Industry in the form of Spitzer. What? Price collusion? The RIAA? Never…..not in a hundred years…..
Jazz-Sax, all things Jazz and Sax