[Infowarrior] - House panel OKs digital licensing bill

[Richard Forno]

" The groups also charged that the bill would, for the first time, require
licenses for every cache, buffer and other "incidental" copy of a song."
--- what a crock!!!!     -rf


House panel OKs digital licensing bill

By Anne Broache
http://news.com.com/House+panel+OKs+digital+licensing+bill/2100-1028_3-60818
74.html

Story last modified Thu Jun 08 18:14:10 PDT 2006

advertisement

A U.S. House of Representatives panel on Thursday approved a digital
copyright bill that critics say could imperil home-use copying of music and
video recording devices like TiVo.

The Section 115 Reform Act, or SIRA, introduced by Texas Republican Lamar
Smith, attempts to overhaul a piece of copyright law that established a
complex system of "mechanical royalties" for record companies, recording
artists, songwriters and publishers in exchange for the right to reproduce
and distribute their music.

There's a general consensus among politicians, the U.S. Copyright Office and
the music industry that the law, first written in the era of piano music
rolls, is in need of updates for a digital era. Right now, companies wishing
to sell music have to negotiate separate licenses for each song's recording.

SIRA proposes establishing a "blanket licensing" system in which those
entities would apply for and receive licenses through a one-stop shop.
Established by the Copyright Office, that body would act as a representative
for music publishing companies with the greatest share of the market.

Supporters of the bill argue that such an approach would make it easier for
online music services to secure speedier approval for vast libraries of
music, opening up the possibility for new market entrants, greater selection
and lower prices.

"We now have the ability to give legal services the tools to compete with
and hopefully drive illegal music services out of business," said California
Democrat Howard Berman, a co-sponsor of the bill.

In a joint statement, the Recording Industry Association of America, the
Digital Media Association and the National Music Publishers Association said
they had "much to gain" from the legislation but still hadn't reached
"complete agreement on all aspects" of it. An RIAA representative contacted
by CNET News.com would not elaborate on those concerns.

Others, including two Democrats who reluctantly agreed to approve the bill
on Thursday, have aired louder gripes about the current language. The
Electronic Frontier Foundation, for its part, encouraged its visitors to
call their elected representatives and make their dissatisfaction known.

In three-page letter (click for PDF) this week to the bill's authors, a
coalition of 19 consumer-oriented advocacy groups--including the American
Association of Law Libraries, BellSouth, the Consumer Electronics
Association, Public Knowledge, RadioShack, and Sirius and XM satellite
radio--claimed the proposal poses a threat to fair use.

Under copyright law, separate licenses exist for the "performance" of a song
and for the reproduction or distribution of it. The consumer groups argued
that the bill views digital recordings as falling into both categories,
which could lead to "potentially duplicative fees" by forcing sellers to pay
more than once for the same content. Those fees, some contend, would have to
be passed on to consumers.

And by viewing digital music in such a light, they argued, Congress could
open the door for requiring licenses for reproductions in other areas,
ranging from time-shift recordings on VCRs or TiVos to analog cassettes or
CDs recorded from the radio. Such a development could lead to a dangerous
erosion in fair use rights, which permit consumers to copy copyrighted
material without permission for noncommercial purposes.

The groups also charged that the bill would, for the first time, require
licenses for every cache, buffer and other "incidental" copy of a song.
"There is no basis for giving copyright owners added control because of
incidental copies that have no independent economic value apart from the
performance itself," the letter said.

Granted, the bill provides that such a license would be "royalty-free"--that
is, of no cost to the user. But the better approach would to exempt those
incidental copies entirely from the licensing regime, said Rep. Rick
Boucher, a Virginia Democrat who added that he'd vote for the bill Thursday
with the understanding that a number of changes would be made. Before the
vote, Boucher gave remarks that essentially echoed the consumer groups'
concerns.

Smith said he would be open to discussing the suggested changes "as soon as
next week, if possible."