- This topic has 75 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
I think Blind has got it right. The PROs will phase in the new system, the old will age out and we will be uploading our song files to the PROs.
+1
So to bring the conversation full circle…what happens to tunesat when the PRO’s have their own fingerprint systems. It remains an expensive way of checking up on the PRO’s?
“Under the 35-year reversion terms of the 1976 Act, copyrights made after Jan. 1, 1978 are eligible to once again become the creator’s property.”
Source:
http://futureofmusic.org/blog/2010/04/21/terminator-rights-reversion-and-musicians
It would be quite easy to revise and amend this Act, or make a new Act, to say this:
“Under the immediate reversion terms of the 2013 Act, all music copyrights ever made for “non exclusive” publishing must become the creator’s property.”
“Under the immediate reversion terms of the 2013 Act, all music copyrights ever made for “non exclusive” publishing must become the creator’s property.”
If you’re in a non-exclusive library the copyright never transferred, it never stopped being your property. The library owns nothing, except a non-exclusive right to represent your music for licensing opportunities. Unless, of course, you agreed to transfer your rights, then go the the back of the class!
I knew somebody would eventually get me to say something “legal” today. 😉
So to bring the conversation full circle…what happens to tunesat when the PRO’s have their own fingerprint systems. It remains an expensive way of checking up on the PRO’s?
Tunesat gets bought out by (or partners with) a PRO.
Personally I`m going to solve the fingerprinting by adding an extra cowbell for all of my different versions of a track. Re-titiling adapts into Re-cowbelling and I can still go non-exclusive with all the libraries I want 😉
@Kenny…make sure you use two different cowbells, large and small.
Oh thanks MichaelL. I never would have thought of that.
Much appreciated!! 🙂If you’re in a non-exclusive library the copyright never transferred, it never stopped being your property.
Michael L – I think any judge will always side with the “original creator” no matter what the circumstances are: exclusive, semi-exclusive, non-exclusive….
@David, I am aware of, but have not read the rights revision clause of the copyright act. I am, in fact going to try to get back some cues that I wrote around then, which I know the library did not move into the digital age.
As far as judges go, my experience is that they uphold the terms of a contract first, provided that there are no defenses to enforcement, like incapacity, over-reaching, or the failure of one party to perform.
_MichaelL
PS. Judges don’t “side”…they preside (unless you’ve reached the Supreme Court). A jury would hear the case (unless a bench trial is stipulated).
I’m looking at this from the perspective of a complete and total “reset, or overhaul” of an entire industry. I would think that the judge(s) would have no choice but to decide in favor of all “original creators” (getting their music back to, once again, become the sole owners of the intellectual property)….we’ll see…
I’m looking at this from the perspective of a complete and total “reset, or overhaul” of an entire industry. I would think that the judge(s) would have no choice but to decide in favor of all “original creators” (getting their music back to, once again, become the sole owners of the intellectual property)….we’ll see…
Without getting into discussions of choice of law (each library might have it’s own provision), jurisdiction (each judge’s rulings only have precedent in their jurisdiction) and the process of going through the federal court system and actually getting the Supreme Court to hear the case (they turn down a lot) maybe…but if anything moves more slowly than technological shift at the PRO’s it is the wheels of justice.
My guess is that the change over to fingerprint technology and the “age-out” process will occur before the Court could hear the case, which would render it moot, in which case the Court would decline to hear the case.
The law is a beautiful thing. 😉
I found out about how Tunesat helped a music library to get a 1000% return on investment. Apparently the German PRO (GEMA) used data from Tunesat to help make a big payout to a library/publisher.
Here is the link: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100608924
Already mentioned here: https://musiclibraryreport.com/forums/topic/gema-pays-on-tunesat-detections/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.