4 ms·
You do understand that bars and venues pay site licenses to PROs like ASCAP and BMI, don't you? And DJs don't need permission thanks to compulsory licenses, but
by jessevondoom 16y ago
You do understand that bars and venues pay site licenses to PROs like ASCAP and BMI, don't you? And DJs don't need permission thanks to compulsory licenses, but they are required to report all plays if they're on-air or spin records in a licensed venue.
- mnutt 16y agoAs far as I know, the fees to ASCAP and BMI only cover performance rights, and have nothing to do with the record labels. It's the fact that streaming digital audio consists of making multiple copies of the same bits that allows them to call it (recording) copyright infringement.
- jessevondoom 16y agoCorrect. I was addressing the commenter saying that uploading them legally and streaming to many is no different than a bar. My whole point was that a bar licenses the music. Purchasing music under a personal license doesn't allow one to broadcast or perform the work, so the justification is off. And it's actually considered the same thing for web streaming — it doesn't have all that much to do with copies. By law webcasting falls under a performance so webcasters are on the hook for both publishing and performance royalties. (Radio gets a waiver on performance royalties and only pays publishing. So the composers get paid, but not necessarily the performers.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_radio#US_royalty_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_radio#US_royalty_contr...