Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Atlantic v. Boggs Case to be Settled; DOJ Will Not Have to Decide Whether to Intervene

In the Corpus Christi, Texas, case, Atlantic v. Boggs, in which the US Department of Justice was contemplating whether or not to intervene on the RIAA's behalf, a notice has been filed in the case, indicating that the the case has been settled, and thus obviating the US Attorney General's dilemma.

Notice of Settlement filed August 1, 2007*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Keywords: digital copyright online law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs


Chris said...

Ray what is the relationship between the ASCAP and the RIAA. The former is now suing bar and restaurant owners for playing their music in their establishments without paying. Here's a link to the article.

Randy said...

Unfortunately, now we'll never know the details of the settlement.

Jadeic said...

Follow these links to read about ASCAP and the RIAA.

These organisations both have different roles to play in the serious issue of the protection of artists' rights. Our only quibble here (classic British understatement!) is their often misguided attempts to flatten any opposition to their aging business models that have yet to adapt to the radical changes in the way in which music can now be delivered to you - the consumer. In most cases their actions seem counter to their avowed responsibility to the artist and only benefit their corporate masters - and frankly sometimes even those benefits are hard to discern or comprehend.

raybeckerman said...

jadeic, i'm surprised at you. Since when has the RIAA been about "artist" rights?

Jadeic said...

Sorry Ray I keep forgetting that irony is not dead over here...

But seriously - I have been following the exploits of the RIAA and the IFPI over many years and am under no illusions about the prime motivation for both organisations but, way back when, there did seem to be a little more regard shown for the rights of the artist (at least in public statements) than latterly. Both organisations have mutated horribly in direct response to the threats that the internet poses to their comfortable control of the distribution business model. They are doomed - but just don't know it yet! As regards ASCAP they too have belatedly realised they too are under serious threat. Perhaps with a little more credence they are now getting tougher on premises that avoid paying the appropriate license for playing music. I don't say I agree with the law. Again though the response is not appropriate in the face of a threat to their business model. To come up with better answers require creative thought - not one of their strong suits. Remember, these are age old institutions and as such, like oil tankers, take a long time to turn around. At least ASCAP has a slightly better reputation for at least funneling the money they collect back to the artists - after no doubt taking a generous cut to cover overheads.

raybeckerman said...

Dear jadeic

The RIAA invokes the interests of "artists" only as a PR stunt since the record companies are not sympathetic. Meanwhile the record companies are about ripping artists off, not "protection of artists' rights".

ASCAP is about protecting the rights of song writers, or more likely the companies who've bought those rights. Its campaign against taverns, restaurants, etc., is nothing new... it wants to pressure them into buying an ASCAP blanket license. I've always thought it was kind of unfair and counterproductive, and ultimately unhelpful to the artists, but it's nothing new. ASCAP's new campaign against guitar teaching sites is in my view unfounded legally, as those would appear to be a shining example of fair use.

Even though I think ASCAP is wrong about some things, I'm not going to lump the 2 organizations together. ASCAP is an organization with some credibility and some honor. The RIAA is a gang of thugs.

jbrooks said...

Did the Trager court notify the Attorney General about the constitutionality challenge in Lindor vs UMG? If so, has the DOJ made a decision whether to intervene?

Jadeic said...

I could not agree more. I'll try not to be so reticent.

I think that should have sorted out schwammo's original query.