Have Netflix, Will Travel: EU Digital Single Market Inches Closer

Negotiators for the European Commission, the European Parliament, and European Union member countries this week reached agreement on new rules that will allow citizens from one EU country to access digital services they subscribe to, such as Netflix, Spotify, and sports live streams, when traveling in another EU country starting in 2018.

Up to now, exclusive territorial licenses between rights owners and online services, as well as other rules, have generally prevented services from granting access to subscribers from outside their home country.

“Today’s agreement will bring concrete benefits to Europeans. People who have subscribed to their favourite series, music and sports events at home will be able to enjoy them when they travel in Europe,” EU vice-president in charge of the Digital Single Market Andrus Ansip said in a statement. Read More »

Copyright Makes Strange Bedfellows

It’s probably fair to say that Donald Trump was not the first choice for president among the majority of those within the media and entertainment industries. Since his election last month, however, their official industry representatives have wasted little time trying to ingratiate themselves with the incoming administration and to press the industries’ policy agenda.

“So much of what you wrote in your platform this summer about intellectual property and private property rights resonated with many of us, including: ‘Intellectual property is a driving force in today’s global economy of constant innovation,'” a consortium of music industry trade associations wrote to Trump this week. “‘It is the wellspring of American economic growth and job creation. With the rise of the digital economy, it has become even more critical that we protect intellectual property rights and preserve freedom of contract rather than create regulatory barriers to creativity, growth, and innovation.’

“As partners, many in the technology and corporate community should be commended for doing their part to help value creators and their content,” the groups added. “Some have developed systems to promote a healthy market for music and deter theft. However, much more needs to be done…[T]here is a massive ‘value grab’ as some of these corporations weaken intellectual property rights for America’s creators by exploiting legal loopholes never intended for them – perversely abusing U.S. law to underpay music creators, thus harming one of America’s economic and job engines.” Read More »

Why MVPDs, Studios Won’t Take Yes For An Answer on STBs

When Federal Communications Chairman Tom Wheeler unveiled his initial proposal to “unlock” the pay-TV set-top box back in January, pay-TV service providers and programmers howled in protest. Operators complained that the proposal, which called for multichannel video program distributors (MVPDs) to make their video feeds, channel listings, and subscriber entitlement data available to third-party device makers as discreet “information flows,” would require a major and expensive re-architecting of their systems. Programmers complained that making their content available directly to device makers with whom the programmers had no contractual arrangement amounted to a de facto compulsory copyright license, which the FCC had no authority to create or enforce.

FCC_buildingBoth threatened to sue.

The two arguments were, in fact, reinforcing. The current carriage agreements TV programmers and distributors have with pay-TV operators are premised in part on pay-TV systems operating in certain ways and not in other ways. Changing how those systems function could cause part of the premise of those licensing agreements to crumble. Read More »

Remastering Copyright

It’s not often that a copyright owner denies owning a copyright in order to press a case for copyright infringement. But that’s essentially the position ABS Entertainment found itself in its legal fight with CBS Radio over the broadcaster’s on-air use of sound recordings made prior to 1972, when recordings came under federal copyright protection. And now a federal judge in California has ruled that ABS is stuck with the consequences of the copyright it never claimed (h/t THR, Esq.)

His_Master's_VoiceThe ruling, if it stands up on the expected appeal, is fairly dripping with implications for music and broadcasting industries (both over-the-air and digital), but also for the film and video industry that makes use of sound recordings in audiovisual works.

Pre-1972 sound recordings have been the focus of considerable controversy in recent years. Prior to 1972, sound recordings were not protected by federal copyright law; only the musical compositions embodied in those recordings were protected. But in 1971 congress updated the law to extend federal copyright protection to sound recordings made after February 15, 1972.

The law continued to exempt over-the-air broadcasters from having to pay public performance royalties to the owners of sound recordings, however (publishers and songwriters get paid), to the dismay of the record labels, on the ostensible grounds that airplay helped promote the sale of records and therefore record companies didn’t need performance royalties. (The real reasons had more to do with the power that broadcasters once wielded in Washington, DC, and in some measure still do.) Read More »

Apple-Dubset Deal Marks A Rights-Tech Milestone

Apple Music this week tapped rights-tech developer Dubset Media to manage clearances and royalty payments for DJ mixes and other mashups, opening the way for thousands of hours of user-generated content to be made available legally on the streaming service.

The deal, which relies on Dubset’s proprietary technology for identifying the individual tracks used in extended mixes and making payments to the appropriate rights owners, marks a milestone for electronic dance music (EDM) and other types of derivative work, such as DJ mixes and remixes, which have become hugely popular with music fans but until now have largely been kept off the major streaming services due to the difficulty and Andy_Moor_DJ_2010complexity of clearing the rights for the dozens of tracks they typically include. Instead, most EDM and DJ mixes wound up on platforms like SoundCloud , which until recently had no licensing deals in place with music labels or publishers, or on underground streaming services that are less particular about copyrights.

“Our genre has grown hand in hand with the rapid growth of streaming and digital services yet, despite billions of online plays, most of our creators and rights-holders earn very little for their efforts compared to their ‘pop’ peers,” Association of Electronic Music CEO Mark Lawrence told Music Business Worldwide in response to the Dubset announcement. “This is the first move to correct the imbalance.”

But the deal also represents a milestone in a growing effort, both in the music business and in other media industries, to bring technology to bear on complex rights-management problems to try to open up new, more efficient and transparent channels for exploiting and monetizing media content rights. Those rights-tech efforts could eventually prove as disruptive to the business of owning, using and licensing media rights as technology has already proved to the distribution side of the business. Read More »

Voices Raised Over Librarian of Congress Nominee

The Librarian of Congress is not generally considered a controversial post within the government. There have only been 13 of them in the Library’s 216-year history, which tells you something about the urgency with which Congress has historically regarded the appointment.

The job is largely administrative, charged with overseeing the libraries vast collection and providing research assistance to Congress. But it also

Dr. Carla Hayden

Dr. Carla Hayden

has some policy-making authority, exercised most prominently in recent decades through its oversight of the U.S. Copyright Office, which is a division of the Library.

Under Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act the Copyright Office must conduct a triennial rulemaking proceeding to determine whether certain types of copyrighted works protected by access control technologies (“technical protection measures”), should be exempted from the DMCA’s ban on circumventing such measures in certain circumstances.

The process has, among other things, led to recognition of a right to unlock a cell phone so it can be used on another network and to circumvent DRM on DVDs for certain teaching purposes, and the right to circumvent DRM on ebooks to allow them to be used with screen readers to assist the visually impaired. Read More »

FCC Goes Searching For A New Set-Top Box

At a press conference following the Federal Communications Commission’s 3-2 vote Thursday to launch a formal rulemaking proceeding aimed at unlocking the set-top box FCC chairman Tom Wheeler emphasized, as he has since announcing the proposal last month, that nothing in the proposed new rules alter existing licensing or content-protection agreements  between networks and pay-TV providers or disrupt existing advertising models.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler gestures at the FCC Net Neutrality hearingOn the contrary, he said, “the rules will require that the sanctity of the content is passed through” unaltered to any new device or app used by consumers to access pay-TV content. That includes, he went on to clarify, the network’s channel position, the content recording rules and the unadorned, original ad load.

“Nobody’s going to be replacing ads, or doing any kind of split screen, with ads on one side, or putting a frame around the content and putting ads around it; none of that,” he said. “The sanctity of the content will be preserved.”

In fact, it’s not clear from his comments what, exactly, Wheeler hopes or expects anyone to be doing with the newly open standards for set-top boxes, assuming the rules ever gets that far through the likely gantlet of lawsuits and foot-dragging  (the formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking the commissioners voted on has not yet been published by the FCC). He took pains at Thursday’s hearing to make it sound as if nothing much would change about set-top boxes at all under the new rules apart from the manufacturer’s name plate, going so far as to put up a pair of identical slides purporting to show before and after schematic drawings of how consumers would access pay-TV content. Read More »

Fighting Piracy in Real Time

Ever since Meerkat and Periscope popped up on the scene, live event producers and rights owners have worried about the potential for piracy from mobile live-streaming apps. In fact, Periscope more or less made its bones, with the public at least,  during the Floyd Mayweather/Manny Pacquaio title fight last year, when the Twitter-owned app led to so much re-broadcasting of the HBO and Showtime feeds of the bout that then-Twitter CEO Dick Costolo, rather indiscreetly, declared Periscope the real “winner” of the night.

Since then, the threat has only grown greater as live-streaming apps have proliferated.

iphone_TV“We saw a lot of new live-streaming apps at CES that are just around the corner,” Clint Cox, VP of technical operations at the Ultimate Fighting Championship said at the Copyright & Technology conference sponsored by GiantSteps Media and the Copyright Society in New York this week. “It’s fairly common technology and it’s becoming a unique challenge for rights owners. It’s a very easy place to put infringing content quickly.”

The problem is doubly complicated by the fact that not all unauthorized streaming of live events is clearly infringing from a copyright perspective, particularly when it comes to live sports. While a licensed broadcaster’s pictures, descriptions and accounts of a sporting event are clearly copyrighted, the game itself — the action on the field, court, ice or ring, as it unfolds in real-time — is not.

Someone sitting in the stands pointing a Periscope-enabled smartphone at the field, therefore, may be violating the venue’s terms and conditions printed on the back of the ticket, but they may not be infringing anyone’s copyright. Read More »

Fahrenheit 512

The Friday night document dump is a tried and true tactic used by businesses as well as government officials looking to avoid a conflagration over the content of the documents. Waiting until a Friday that happens to fall on New Year’s Eve, however, has a panache all its own.

That’s when the U.S. Copyright Office dropped a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) into the Federal Register seeking comments on whether section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, dealing with the procedures for notice and takedown of infringing material, is working effectively and as Congress intended when it passed the law back in 1996. But if the Copyright Office was hoping that few would notice the NOI, or that it might be able to keep the comments down to a dull roar it will almost surely be disappointed.

Library-of-Congress-Reading-RoomNo one who actually has to follow or apply the Section 512 procedures thinks they’re working well or effectively. Google alone was processing nearly 20 million takedown requests per week at the end 2015, while copyright owners see the system as a hopeless game of Whac-a-Mole, in which files get removed only to reappear quickly under a different URL. Litigation between copyright owners and online service providers — over the scope of the Section 512 safe harbor, which shields service providers from liability for infringing content posted by users if they follow the proscribed takedown procedures, the legal standard for culpable knowledge of infringing activity, and the efficacy of enforcement against repeat infringers — has formed a near-constant backdrop to the law almost since it took effect in 1998, most epically in the seven-year legal battle between Viacom and Google over content posted to YouTube. Many have been waiting years to get a crack at rewriting the safe harbor rules and they’re not likely to let the opportunity pass. Read More »

How The CRB Has Done The Music Industry A Favor (Updated)

With the possible exception of Taylor Swift, Janet Yellen may now be the most powerful person in the music business. As chair of the Federal Reserve, Yellen controls the levers that control the rate of consumer inflation in the U.S., a number on which potentially millions of dollars in music royalty revenues will now turn in the wake of Wednesday’s ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) setting the royalty rates that internet radio services like Pandora and iHeartMedia must pay to record labels and artists for the next five years.

Under the new rate card, internet radio services will pay 17 cents per 100 streams in 2016 ($0.0017 per stream), up nearly 20 percent from the 14 yellencents per 100 streams they pay today but well below the 25 cents per 100 that SoundExchange, which collects digital royalties for artists, had sought. After that, the rate will be indexed to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the main gauge the government users to track inflation, for the next four years, which means the rate could go up or down with the price of bread.

It was an unexpected and deeply peculiar move that looked like nothing so much as an effort by the CRB, an arm of the Library of Congress, to get out of the rate-setting business, which itself would be mighty peculiar insofar as its role in setting royalty rates for webcasters is mandated by Congress and not really optional on CRB’s part. Read More »

Aereo’s Fuzzy Legal Legacy

While the FCC seems to have backed off for now from a proposal to update the regulatory definition of multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) to include certain types of over-the-top services, the battle over how the law should treat online video rages on along other fronts.

aereo_antennaOn Wednesday, a redacted copy of an opinion issued under seal last month by U.S. district court judge Rosemary Collyer, concluding that OTT broadcast service FilmOn X was not entitled to the compulsory license that cable and satellite services rely on when they retransmit copyrighted content contained in broadcast signals, was released to the public. And even with the redactions, it’s now clear that Judge Collyer took a 180-degree different view of the question than U.S. district judge George Wu took last year in ruling that FilmOn was, in fact, entitled to the compulsory license.

The two questions — who qualifies as a MVPD under FCC regulations? and who qualifies for the compulsory copyright license MVPDs rely on? — are legally distinct, but closely related. Read More »

A World Of Difference: Copyright in TPP and the EU

The full and final text of the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement was officially released today, giving the public and Congress their first look at the long-gestating and controversial trade deal. And it’s clear from the chapters on intellectual property and investment that content creators and copyright owners got more or less everything they were seeking from the deal.

The treaty, which Congress will now have 90 days to vote up or down but cannot change, would require countries to ban the circumvention of EU headquarterstechnical protection measures (i.e. DRM) and, like the the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the U.S., to sever liability for circumvention from any actual infringement of copyright. In other words, circumvention is verboten whether or not it results in an infringement under a participating country’s national copyright law.

The text does allow countries to pass exceptions to the ban on circumvention for non-infringing uses, as the DMCA permits through a triennial rulemaking by the Library of Congress, but it does not make those exceptions mandatory. The text also avoids any reference to a U.S.-style fair use principal while extending the term of copyright in all TPP countries to the U.S. standard of the life of the author plus 70 years. Read More »

Competing With Free

The RIAA reported had some good news and some not-so-good news this week about the state of the music business. The good news is that while sales of CDs and permanent downloads continue to fall, revenue from paid-streaming subscriptions through the first half of 2015 was up a solid 25 percent from the first half of 2014, to $478 million. The not-so-good news is that the number of Americans actually paying for music subscriptions is growing much slower, up a sluggish 2.5 percent, or 200,000 subscribers, to 8.1 million.

Optimists noted that the first-half data did not include Apple Music, which launched June 30th, and that second-half numbers should be show faster growth. The New York Post reported this week, citing “music industry sources” that 15 million people had signed up for Apple’s paid-streaming service during the three-month free trial RIAA_paying_subscribersperiod, which ends Sept. 20th, and that roughly half those folks — 7.5 million — had not (yet) turned off the automatic payment feature the will soon turn them into paying subscribers. It wasn’t clear from the report, however, how many of those 7.5 million are in the U.S.

The optimists also note that while the number of paying subscribers was relatively flat, average revenue per subscriber was up 21.6 percent, to $118, perhaps reflecting a shift by consumers to more expensive services like Jay-Z’s Tidal.

Yet while growth in the paid-subscriber base flags, free, ad-supported streaming services like Pandora and Sirius XM continue to be hugely popular. Pandora claims to have 80 million active monthly listeners, only a tiny fraction of which pay for its ad-free tier. Due to licensing issues, Pandora is only available in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand, so the bulk of those 80 million users must be in the U.S. Read More »