Group items tagged

An article from BNO News has recently reported that LimeWire has been shut down by a U.S. court on claims that the site was used for infringement. LimeWire is notorious for allowing its users to download music without paying for the file, which begs the question, is this legal? The Recording Industry Association of American, which represents several important record labels such as Sony, EMI, Universal, and Warner filed a lawsuit against LimeWire in 2006 stating that the company was allowing downloading of illegal music, violating the terms of the music's copyright. Since these record labels own the copyrights to the majority of the music that was being distributed, they were losing money and business because they were not getting paid for the use of their music. Lime Group, the company that owns LimeWire, continues to function otherwise, it is just this subsidiary that has been ceased to conduct business. Although the future seems bleak for LimeWire, its CEO remains optimistic.

On October 27, 2010 a very popular music sharing application called Limewire was shut down due to copyright infringement. BNO news reported the story to wireupdate.com and the a few record labels like SOny, EMI, Universal and Warner filed a lawsuit against Limewire in 2006 so this is nothing new for the file sharing company. The Lime Group CEO and owner of Limewire George Searle said "challenging time, we are excited about the future." So he seems to have a good outlook on the future eeven though his company is going through this touch time.

Web Exclusive: Model Congress Takes Top Prize at Columbia--The Record did not run this issue in print version last week although it was a big win for HM. Why?

The popular band black eyed peas is facing dual lawsuits for two of their popular songs that were released in their new album the E.N.D. This article explains the details of who an why those singer/songwriters are suing and point out a pattern that both the peas and there recording groups, universal records and universal music group, have engaged in "a pattern and practice of intentional copyright infringement with respect to the unlawful copying of songs of unknown or lesser-known artists." This article portrays the ongoing pattern of copyright lawsuits that have arisen due to advancements in the digital music business, and is just one example of many high profile lawsuits with millions of dollars involved. (The two songs that they are accused of stealing combined for a total of 10.7 digital units sold).

The article is about a case regarding a violation to the Copyright Act. Whitney Harper, a high school cheerleader, participated in infringing activity on LimeWire between the ages 14-16, claiming that she thought she was simply internet radio streaming. With this "innocent infringer's" defense, she is requesting a $200 fine per song to the Recording Industry of America as opposed to the Copyright Act's minimum $750 per song fine. This would result in a total payment of $7,400 rather than $27,750. The final decision has not yet been made, and the justices of the Supreme Court have the option of taking the case and issuing a ruling, or declining to hear it. The author takes a very neutral viewpoint on the issue, expressing the opinions on both sides of the case. He presents the information in a very factual rather than biased way, and concludes the article in a non-opinionated manner. David Kravets is a technologist, political scientist, humorist, and reporter.

NPR: 50 Great Voices is a weekly music oriented podcast. Every week the broadcast showcases a relatively unheard amazing vocalist whom they wish to share with their listeners. Each week of the year a new singer is brought on the show, this episode was broadcasted on February 1, 2011. This week's episode was focused on a jazz/pop singer named Dianne Reeves who the show was interested in because of the fact that she'd so beautifully mixed the two genres. The show provides a brief background history of the singer, i.e. what they've done in the past, who they've worked for, and what records they appear on. After listening to the two songs by Dianne Reeves the show provided I have come to the conclusion that she is an exceptionally talented woman, who is way worth listening to and in the future I would like to see new pieces of her career become public.

"I can't afford to pay any amount. It's not a matter of won't, it's a matter of I can't." In Minnesota, this is the response that Jammie Thomas-Rasset made about paying 1.5 million dollars for the illegal sharing of music online. Each of the 24 songs that she illegally violated copyrights on is $62,500. Her defense is that she can't afford to pay that kind of money, especially since she is the mother of four children. Sharing over 1,700 songs on Kazaa, a file-sharing site, the Recording Industry of America, on numerous occasions, had tried to settle with the woman at $5,000. The stubborn Thomas-Rasset refused and was criticized for not taking responsibility for her actions. Due to all these problems, Jammie was taken on trial and was proven guilty. Jammie persistently denies her use of Kazaa and is willing to keep fighting. Many people are in the same position as Jammie, and as the saying goes, "Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time."

A highlight on the discussion of Sound Recording and Popular Music from Chapter 3

This article is about creative commons, and how music artists are starting to prefer it over traditional copyright. Artists such as "Chuck D and the Fine Arts Militia" released their new single under creative commons, and encouraged people to copy it, mix it, criticize it and other things. Now the song has been incorporated into new types of music and videos, and every time those are viewed, it links back to the original artist, giving them immediate popularity. Once other artists saw how this was giving the band more fans, they started releasing their songs under creative commons as well. Copyright laws provide limited flexibility, and make it harder for artists to get as many fans as they would if they released their songs under Creative Commons. Artists and authors have been saying that creative commons allows others to "build upon their creativity -- without calling a lawyer first." Now, artists are making half of their money off downloads and the other half off licensing fees. However, while many artists and authors are starting to release their work under creative commons, others like major movie studios or record labels will not, because they already make plenty of money off the current traditional copyright system.

Creative Commons licenses are changing the media sharing environment of the internet. When people share media with a creative commons label, anybody is allowed to download, upload, and share it for free. This is good for artists who want to grow their fan bases, but bad for companies who are looking to profit from their work.

This article is about how there are many ways that people are trying to stream music, movies, and television shows through the internet. These are legal or illegal depending on the location of the computer based on the countries piracy laws and on the contracts that the media streaming company makes with publishers/recording companies/etc. since they are trying to do this in a legal fashion. In some European companies, they are streaming music via a new service, Spotify, where subscribers can listen to music for free with advertisements, or pay short of 5 pounds for ad-free streaming. However, due to contractual disagreement, Spotify is not available in USA but they are in fact trying to bring this cheaper (but legal) music service to the Americans which could abruptly change the music industry as well as bring turmoil to services like iTunes.