PDA

View Full Version : No Direct Linking to be legal???


fc*uk
9th December 2006, 18:46
Anyone else ever catch this:

Webcast licenses are issued by web domain, not by radio station. LoudCity.com is licensed by ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SoundExchange. Music launched from your website is not licensed. If you want to launch music from your own website, then you need to apply for your own licenses with ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SoundExchange and pay them directly.

Meaning if someone directly links into your site, you are not covered under the license.

However, I have emailed them and they said that things such as shoutcast.com are supported under their services (very specific list and NOT everyone).

OK. So someone tunes in from the yp, they like your station and they bookmark you or save you as a playlist. Cool. They are not really tuning in from the yp anymore; does this mean that you are no longer covered?

What makes tuning in from shoutcast.com so much better than clicking the button from my site (which they specifically say I can not do)? All both are doing is connecting to my server and pulling the listen.pls file...

I just don't really get it.

sputnik radio
9th December 2006, 18:57
yeah its all messed up.

but if someone links to your stream on their site . its their worry not yours.

you will not get in trouble if someone else is doing it.

we cannot control what others do can we?


I think that policy is a little bit of an over kill

theoretically it wouldnt be wrong if say someone had a link to their music on their own home page without having to have the LC launch page. IF and this is a big IF.

IF the stream launches from the LICENSED host DNS.

meaning say my streams IP is: 123.123.123.123:8000

well if the only way i advertise my stream is as say MYLICENSEDHOSTDNS.COM:8000/listen.pls.


then that would be ok really.

thats what wrw and others do


of course you know who could come in here with a lightneing bolt and tell me im wrong.

but then again like its been argued so many times . The licensing for internet radio is a snafu and its unfair and it needs to be revamped.

fc*uk
9th December 2006, 19:06
I agree that this is overkill. However, it brings a major issue into play:

How the heck are you supposed to promote your stream(s) if you can't have people link from your website? What is the point. If the only places that people are allowed to legally get at you is from, in this case, loudcity or the yp...

IF the stream launches from the LICENSED host DNS.

Which as far as I can tell that places like LoudCity will not allow you to do.

So what the hell are they getting at here? Go after ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SoundExchange and pay them directly as they suggest? Screw that!!! I am not dealing with all of the bullshit paperwork that I pay places like LC to file for me.

Or is the point really to make the small fish who do not have the time to file with everyone under the sun in every country to simply step out of the game...


but then again like its been argued so many times . The licensing for internet radio is a snafu and its unfair and it needs to be revamped.

What? Like the fact that we pay nearly double in royalities than an actual radio station has to pay??? You mean to tell me that is not fair. My god, I would watch your back the RIAA and DMCA are going to hunt you down under the Patriot Act (which means all they have to say is you were a threat to the country because you are spreading the idea that internet broadcasters are getting screwed!).

sputnik radio
9th December 2006, 19:16
Im a proletariat of the internet radio biz.

I recently read in an article . Dont ask me where. But a study done in the UK about media.

The study concluded that in 10 years from now there will be only TWO forms of media that have a place in the economey.

1. Internet

2. Radio


all other forms of media are dying. Like newspapers, magazines, Even TV with video on demand and netflix now.



So internet radio is a good combination.

The laws will have to change soon. The PEOPLE have spoken.

FOLLOW ME

http://www.bagatela.krakow.pl/premiery/kurs_mistrzowski/media/proletariat.gif

fc*uk
9th December 2006, 19:22
yes. indeed other forms of media are being killed. Which is why any streaming media over the internet is getting killed in fines; it is a last ditch resort to save a dieing breed.

For now I will give them their money and comply with the format that they want the streams in, but things like the no direct linking is simply a load of horseshit.

sputnik radio
10th December 2006, 12:52
Originally posted by fc*uk
yes. indeed other forms of media are being killed. Which is why any streaming media over the internet is getting killed in fines; it is a last ditch resort to save a dieing breed.

For now I will give them their money and comply with the format that they want the streams in, but things like the no direct linking is simply a load of horseshit.


Thats how they make an extra buck or two. By selling you the custom launch page. It's bad enough that you got a hustler around ever corner in this game trying to take every cent you got along the way.

tis all bout the money

SorceryKid
10th December 2006, 17:29
SWCast Network enforces similar requirements as mandated by our license agreements with ASCAP and BMI. (Although we make an exception for outside hyperlinks that directly launch our desktop player, MyTuner).

These are amongst the legal issues we are currently addressing through our Webcaster trade association. So, I have taken note of your concerns.

--Randall

dotme
10th December 2006, 19:04
Originally posted by fc*uk
For now I will give them their money and comply with the format that they want the streams in, but things like the no direct linking is simply a load of horseshit.
Yes, it is. But those are the rules set down by BMI, ASCAP, SESAC etc. They are not rules "invented" by SWCast or LoudCity. Don't shoot the messenger. I'm guessing it's an enforcement issue. By licensing domains it becomes easier for the music associations to identify illegal streamers.

When you sign up with SWCast, or LoudCity, you're webcasting under the license they hold... not your own. Think of your station as a channel on a licensed network. The upside is that this aggregation, in both cases, results in substantial savings for the hobbyist and makes legal webcasting an affordable reality for someone who's in it for the love of the music, not huge profits.

Were it not for companies like these, I would never have been able to afford to start up a station legally. I'm willing to give up some freedoms for the lower cost.

But, like Randall, I would love to see fewer restrictions in the long term.

Who wouldn't? ;)

fc*uk
10th December 2006, 23:17
Dotme,

you are indeed correct and I am in the process of making all of my streams compliant with these current rules.

I never wanted to suggest that LC setup these rules. It seemed pretty insane for someone to pull out of thin air so I guessed, as Randall pointed out, that some agency was actually behind all of this. And, to be quite honest, the reasoning behind licensing a domain sounds very logical to me. At least in terms of how much easier it makes things.

The main reason why I started this thread was because I have been doing this for slightly over a year now. I have known about the problems with the yp and as a result, I took matters into my own hands and pushed everyone to webpages. Like I said, I have been doing this for a little over a year. No one has ever said anything to me about this and I have never known it to be anything but legal because, heck, as far as I knew my streams were licensed.

However, this weekend, I was helping one of my local friends setup a stream and the person wanted to play copyright material. I told the guy that he needed to get his stream licensed ... I went through loud city, etc, etc. Well, when we were signing him up that is when I noticed the quote I have at the beginning of the thread.

Naturally, the first thought through my mind was "oh shit". I arranged it so nearly all of my serious listeners went through a website or something non yp/loudcity related. Which means that my stream was never really legal.

Then I got to thinking. If a user bookmarks the stream in Winamp or saves the playlist and tunes in using that. Isn't that illegal as well because the user did not come to the stream via the yp or whom ever I am licensed through? Furthermore, how can I be liable if a user does that as I can not control how they find my station much after the initial tune in?

Furthermore, how can anyone really tell how the listener gets to the stream?

Lastly I wanted to start this thread as a slight dig to point out that, technically to be legal, we MUST rely solely on the yp to do our advertising for us...

sputnik radio
10th December 2006, 23:21
or you could purchase you one of those fancy custom launch pages.