37 ms·

The part that really gets me is that Universal isn't even trying to help people "do the right thing". In the email from Greg Morris he states: "The problem I'm

The part that really gets me is that Universal isn't even trying to help people "do the right thing". In the email from Greg Morris he states: "The problem I'm having is the ambiguity of the feedback. For example, on the first strike you just said "Universal Music" said I used one of their tunes. The set started with an Ellie Golding song which I thought was the problem. So I removed that and re-uploaded. It was then taken down again. You're not even telling me which songs are infringing." That is infuriating. He is trying to oblige to the request to remove a copyrighted song, but Universal isn't even telling him how he is in violation.

anigbrowl 12y ago
Oh boo hoo. He's promoting his own internet radio show, it's up to him to work out clearances. He asks what basis they have for doing it, like choice of law etc., well read the ToS, that's why it's there. 'Other people do it too!' is about the most juvenile argument there is, and the fact that they haven't experienced problems yet is neither here nor there. Maybe Universal hasn't got around to yanking stuff from them yet, maybe they have proper clearances or pay ASCAP feees, or maybe Universal/Soundcloud is enforcing their copyright arbitrarily...which they're perfectly entitled to do as a private entity. Equal treatment under law only applies to the government, unless you can show you're being discriminated against as a member of a protected class. So his problem is he doesn't know which song(s) is/are infringing? Take your tracklisting and check it against discogs.com or some other music publishing database, and see which songs were published by Universal Music. Maybe 30 minutes of work for a 1 hour show, tops. The responsibility to check clearances does lie with the person who wants to use a copyrighted work. Edit: I realize this is an unpopular view, but if you're downvoting I invite you to spell out what you think is wrong about it. Every magazine/website/course aimed at budding record producers/DJs/musicians provides coverage of copyright and licensing issues, to help their readership collect what is owed to them as much as to avoid infringement. There is no way you can be an aspiring or actual professional in the music industry for any significant length of time and not be aware of your basic obligations in this area.
- afro88 12y ago
  People might be downvoting this because of it's tone, but it's correct. If you're putting up radio shows, DJ sets or anything that uses other people's music you need to clear each track in it. Owning a piece of music doesn't entitle you to broadcast it, it merely entitles you to listen to it.
  - Argorak 12y ago
    This is a tricky subject. If you are german, you are entitled to broadcast it. Germany has mandatory licensing for broadcast through GEMA.
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      Well, you'd still owe a fee as the broadcaster. Unless I'm very muh mistaken, you can't just buy a bunch of CDs and then have public performance rights; it's just that as long as you pay the GEMA fees, rightholders can't decline to license the work to you. Here's a good Techdirt article about GEMA (and regular readers will know I usually find TD a deplorable source due to poor reportage, but this is an exception): https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/17042522839/how-gema-is-still-worst-collective-rights-organization-world.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/17042522839/how-g...
      - Argorak 12y ago
        That's why I said "entitled". Yes, you don't have the license unless you pay GEMA (after the fact, btw), but the license must be granted to you at a fixed fee.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  In an actual legal case it is your right to be told exactly what you are charged with. Universal is taking actions based on copyright law but outside the legal system and refusing to be specific. This is allowed behavior but it is extremely distasteful. It is not acceptable to mistreat someone because they are doing 'something' wrong.

anigbrowl 12y ago

Oh boo hoo. He's promoting his own internet radio show, it's up to him to work out clearances. He asks what basis they have for doing it, like choice of law etc., well read the ToS, that's why it's there. 'Other people do it too!' is about the most juvenile argument there is, and the fact that they haven't experienced problems yet is neither here nor there. Maybe Universal hasn't got around to yanking stuff from them yet, maybe they have proper clearances or pay ASCAP feees, or maybe Universal/Soundcloud is enforcing their copyright arbitrarily...which they're perfectly entitled to do as a private entity. Equal treatment under law only applies to the government, unless you can show you're being discriminated against as a member of a protected class. So his problem is he doesn't know which song(s) is/are infringing? Take your tracklisting and check it against discogs.com or some other music publishing database, and see which songs were published by Universal Music. Maybe 30 minutes of work for a 1 hour show, tops. The responsibility to check clearances does lie with the person who wants to use a copyrighted work. Edit: I realize this is an unpopular view, but if you're downvoting I invite you to spell out what you think is wrong about it. Every magazine/website/course aimed at budding record producers/DJs/musicians provides coverage of copyright and licensing issues, to help their readership collect what is owed to them as much as to avoid infringement. There is no way you can be an aspiring or actual professional in the music industry for any significant length of time and not be aware of your basic obligations in this area.

afro88 12y ago
People might be downvoting this because of it's tone, but it's correct. If you're putting up radio shows, DJ sets or anything that uses other people's music you need to clear each track in it. Owning a piece of music doesn't entitle you to broadcast it, it merely entitles you to listen to it.
- Argorak 12y ago
  This is a tricky subject. If you are german, you are entitled to broadcast it. Germany has mandatory licensing for broadcast through GEMA.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    Well, you'd still owe a fee as the broadcaster. Unless I'm very muh mistaken, you can't just buy a bunch of CDs and then have public performance rights; it's just that as long as you pay the GEMA fees, rightholders can't decline to license the work to you. Here's a good Techdirt article about GEMA (and regular readers will know I usually find TD a deplorable source due to poor reportage, but this is an exception): https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/17042522839/how-gema-is-still-worst-collective-rights-organization-world.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130425/17042522839/how-g...
    - Argorak 12y ago
      That's why I said "entitled". Yes, you don't have the license unless you pay GEMA (after the fact, btw), but the license must be granted to you at a fixed fee.
Dylan16807 12y ago
In an actual legal case it is your right to be told exactly what you are charged with. Universal is taking actions based on copyright law but outside the legal system and refusing to be specific. This is allowed behavior but it is extremely distasteful. It is not acceptable to mistreat someone because they are doing 'something' wrong.