Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )



Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Dmca Regulations?
Bookmark and Share
Snoogans 
Posted: 12-Jul-2005, 04:26 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Clan Member
***

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 68
Joined: 20-Apr-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: Edinburgh

male





What are they and why do they hold my requests for an hour?
Add on the other songs in the queue and I am often not at my desk/computer to hear my requests.
Very sadly putting me off listening these days... sad.gif
PMEmail Poster                
Top
CelticRadio 
Posted: 12-Jul-2005, 07:58 PM
Quote Post

Member is Online



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 8,266
Joined: 23-Sep-2001
ZodiacOak

Realm: Boston, MA

male





The DMCA stands for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998.

Basically we have to hold the request for a certain number of minutes before it plays.

I wish there was something we could do about it, but that is what the rules for webcasting state. Atleast in the U.S.

Sorry Snoogans.


--------------------
Wallace MacArthur
http://www.CelticRadio.net
Celtic Radio Music Network

Imagination is more Important than Knowledge
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               View my Facebook Profile.View my Linked-In Profile.View my Google plus Profile.View my Twitter Profile.View My Space Profile.View my YouTube Profile.
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 13-Jul-2005, 05:19 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







I wondered the same thing, and I'm glad for the explanation (if not the situation. . . sad.gif ) Ah, well. It makes it all the sweeter when the request finally comes up.

Why is it that requests are sometimes disabled? Has that to do with DMCA as well, or just your own programming arrangements?
PMEmail Poster               
Top
MDF3530 
  Posted: 13-Jul-2005, 05:43 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Madman with a box
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 7,287
Joined: 30-Jul-2002
ZodiacAlder

Realm: Midlothian, IL

male





QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 13-Jul-2005, 05:19 PM)
I wondered the same thing, and I'm glad for the explanation (if not the situation. . . sad.gif ) Ah, well. It makes it all the sweeter when the request finally comes up.

Why is it that requests are sometimes disabled? Has that to do with DMCA as well, or just your own programming arrangements?

That would be due to programming, like if it's Featured Artist hour or something like that.


--------------------
Mike F.

May the Irish hills caress you.
May her lakes and rivers bless you.
May the luck of the Irish enfold you.
May the blessings of Saint Patrick behold you.


user posted image
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
Aaediwen 
Posted: 13-Jul-2005, 07:28 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3,061
Joined: 09-Oct-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: Kentucky

male





I'll try not to get started on the DMCA and its European counterpart. The DMCA is the only piece of legislation I've hated bad enough to read in its entirety in a search for reasons why it is how it is. There have been ammendments to it since 1998 which make it a little less evil, but yes, to immidiately play requests is a violation of it (as is using a candle to melt a paper-thin wax lock preventing you from reading a book).



--------------------
Poet and seeker of knowledge



Mountain Legacy -- Born in the isles, raised in Appalachia
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               View My Space Profile.
Top
CelticRadio 
Posted: 13-Jul-2005, 09:01 PM
Quote Post

Member is Online



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 8,266
Joined: 23-Sep-2001
ZodiacOak

Realm: Boston, MA

male





The other part to consider is the we play a ton of independent musicians. I personally receive communications from these musicians thanking us for playing their music and getting the word out about their music, CDs and some have even been hired because of CelticRadio.net

I heard recently that certain Rock and Pop internet radio stations, even ones through Live365, have received letters from RIAA. Not sure what is up with that!

My hope is that since we play so many independent musicians and since we are not digging into anyone's mainstream profits that they will just leave us alone. We do everything we reasonably can to comply with all of the regulations.

I honestly believe that we have done alot of good to promote Celtic music and have not really asked for anything in return. And I say WE because it is the listeners and members that promote CelticRadio to musicians and let them know we are out there - making our reputation even better. Thanks again for all of your support!
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               View my Facebook Profile.View my Linked-In Profile.View my Google plus Profile.View my Twitter Profile.View My Space Profile.View my YouTube Profile.
Top
subhuman 
Posted: 19-Oct-2005, 04:26 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 418
Joined: 16-Oct-2005
ZodiacWillow

Realm: 127.0.0.1

male





QUOTE
I heard recently that certain Rock and Pop internet radio stations, even ones through Live365, have received letters from RIAA. Not sure what is up with that!


A little background on our buddies, the RIAA: it's been proven time and again in court that they're filing frivolous lawsuits. Their tactics in the realm of people file-sharing are probably the worst, for the record they have not won a single lawsuit in this department to date. There are countless instances of the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) and the ACLU filing counter-suits and motions to quash against the RIAA due to the RIAA employing illegal teactics in their "fact" finding operations. There are examples of the RIAA filing motions to get ISPs to release users personal information, as many as 250 people on one motion- and in those cases the RIAA had no proof for up to 247 of the people, and questionable proof for the other three. The link the the EFF's website is here http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/?f=riaa-v-thepeople.html and it's worth looking at what the RIAA is up to.
The only "victories" they've had were due to imtimidating people to file settlements out of court, typically when they had little or no evidence agains thte individuals.
The only battle the RIAA has won in court was versus Napster. For those iinterested, the transcript and an MP3 of the arguments before the 9'th Circuit Court of Appeals in the MGM v Grokster case is here: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2...040823002045984
The irony of this case is the precedent was set back in '84 (court case originally filed in '78) during the Universal Studios v Sony case. The Sony decision basicly said that the maker of a product is not liable for its use, if they do not have a continuing relationship with the consumer andas long as it has significant non-infringing uses. It was estimated that approximately 7% of the uses for the Sony Betamax recorder were non-infringing, and as we've seen the home recording equipment market has only grown since that time.
The irony I previously mentioned? Sony acquired Columbia in the 90's, and they are now a member of both the RIAA and MPAA. Their own court case has come back to shoot them in the..... foot. smile.gif


--------------------
I have two modes: wiseass and dumbass. Mode is determined by current blood alcohol level.

Drinking is a sport. In order to be competitive, you must practice on a regular basis. Although you can practice alone, it is much more fun to practice with friends. If you're out of shape and practice too hard, you will regret it the next day.

Life is a disease. It is sexually transmitted and always terminal.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aaediwen 
Posted: 19-Oct-2005, 05:33 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3,061
Joined: 09-Oct-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: Kentucky

male





I've heard it said that the RIAA illigally attempted DOS attacks on IRC servers and illigal cracks into individuals' machines to remove files. I doubt these are true, but wouldn't that be a nasty piece of hypocracy if it were the case. And honestly, although I doubt it's true, I don't doubt they'd try it.
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               View My Space Profile.
Top
subhuman 
Posted: 20-Oct-2005, 04:14 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 418
Joined: 16-Oct-2005
ZodiacWillow

Realm: 127.0.0.1

male





So far, reports of their Denial of Services (DOS) attacks and hack attempts have been unproven.
However, they did try to get an act passed a while back that would absolve them of any incidental damages caused to a person's system while they checked said system for protected content without the owner's permission. I'd have to look it up, but I belive it was a "rider" on one of the Patriot acts.
There may be no proof of them performing the acts, but there is evidence of their intent.
Here's a link to a an example of the RIAA in all their glory. They're suing a 14-year old Michigan girl. Thier lawsuit against her mother was dismissed by the court, so now they're going after a kid. The RIAA is trying to get the court to appoint a legal guardian to the child so they can have a second go-around with this case. If the child's mother remains the legal guardian, they cannot try to sue again.
http://www.p2pnet.net/stuff/chan3.pdf

In all this, I'm not arguing that an artist doesn't deserve to get paid for their work. I'm just wondering if the artists know what the RIAA is going to do in order to "defend" them. If you follow the court cases on these matters, the overwhelming majority are brought about by representatives of the labels, not the artists. The RIAA is never listed as a representative of the artist. In most cases, the artists don't even say a single word in support.

Not paying an artist for their work raises some serious moral issues, but how about the issues raised by suing children and, for all legal intents and purposes, taking them away from their parents???

Back to RIAA misinformation: despite their claims of losses due to file sharing, the only down period the industry had was from 2000-2002, when annual sales dropped from 940 million to 800 million. That's roughly a 15% drop, which corresponds with what the US economy in general went through in the same time period.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aaediwen 
Posted: 20-Oct-2005, 07:13 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3,061
Joined: 09-Oct-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: Kentucky

male





I'd still like to see the numbers on how many people used P2P file sharing to help them when going out to buy CDs. Were it not for these services, my CD library would probably not be a quarter the size it is. Also, it's growth has stagnated considerably since I stopped using said services some time ago. Right now, My Celtic collection is the only one growing at all. Because Highlander Radio is the only place I trust where I'm finding new music, unless I just happen to hear of some cool new gothic or 'dragon metal' band. I know I'm not the only one who used file sharing to build a very large, legit music collection. But you never hear the RIAA saying a word about how P2P might be benefiting them.

For the record, the whole legal issue is not my reason for no longer using P2P. It became impractical and unreliable for what I was looking for.
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               View My Space Profile.
Top
ChocolateFilk 
Posted: 20-Oct-2005, 10:50 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Knight of the Round Table
*******

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 151
Joined: 12-Oct-2001
ZodiacElder

Realm: San Diego Area

male





With the way the RIAA has been behaving the last few years, I have stopped buying any albums from major labels. I only buy from small or independent artists. I have never used a P2P service for music. I did like the original MP3.com website when it was around, bought several CDs through them.

I recently installed Itunes and have gotten five songs. Most were from independant artist, one was an old Tiny Tim tune.

I also do not do business with Amazon.com, due mostly to their bad habit of trying to patent bits of software code. I usually buy direct from the artist or from a small dealers. Or online vendors like CD Baby.



--------------------
Jesus is Lord ||| Love Kate ||| Clan Ross ||| Science Fiction ||| Windbourne Sound ||| Filker
PMEmail PosterUsers Website               
Top
subhuman 
Posted: 21-Oct-2005, 06:47 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 418
Joined: 16-Oct-2005
ZodiacWillow

Realm: 127.0.0.1

male





QUOTE
With the way the RIAA has been behaving the last few years, I have stopped buying any albums from major labels. I only buy from small or independent artists.


I feel the same way. I try to buy direct from the artist whenever I can. If it an individual or a group at a fest, I buy them a beer. The beer is usually worth more than what they'd make off the CD sale anyway.

QUOTE
I recently installed Itunes and have gotten five songs. Most were from independant artist, one was an old Tiny Tim tune.


The problem I have with most of the online purchase servicesis that you're more limited with usage restrictions than you are if you buy the actual CD. Most limit the number of times it can be copied as well as what formats it can be converted to. At first this doesn't sound like a bad idea. However, that song you bought today may not be able to be converted to a format that will work on tomorrow's players. You just wasted your money. This wasn't the case several years back. If you bought an LP "back in the day" you could copy it to a cassette to take it with you. Then CDs came out, so you sopied it onto a CD to take it with you. Then you wanted to play it on you rocmputer, so you ciped it there. Now you have a portable media player, so you have a copy there.
Every time this has been legal- with one condition. You're not allowed to play more than one copy simultaneously. However, you have legally changed the medium of the recording four times in order to keep up with technological developments. Most paid for and downloaded tracks don't let you switch format (i.e. OGG to MP3 or such) ever, and they limit how many times you can copy it to CD. Considering that the CD-R you buy at the store has a relatively short life expectancy, you can use up the standard 3-5 allow times rather quickly. I've had CD-Rs go bad in a little over a year, even when they weren't used.

While we're on the topic of CD-Rs, ever wonder what the difference is between a data CD-R and a music CD-R? Just as with every black cassette tape sold, the recording industry gets a cut of the money for every music CD-R sold.
They're already getting paid off those, which is why they're so opposed to devices such as an iPod- they don't get money from them.

For those interested, this link will help you determine if a label is a member of the RIAA or not. It's one that I use as a factor in determining whethr I'll buy a CD or not. http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/

Back to my previous post, there's still no proof of the RIAA "hacking" computers, but this case was filed on Setp 30'th and one of the claims alledges that they hacked the plaintiff's system. http://www.p2pnet.net/stuff/andersen.pdf Since this was filed 3 weeks ago I feel safe in saying it hasn't gone to court yet. It will be interesting to follow this one. If the outcome is that the RIAA (or their agents) is/are hacking in peoples' systems that opens up a whole other can of worms. Ironicly, if they did anything such as look at a person's e-mail without permission, that is considered- you guessed it- Copyright Infringement.
Aaediwen said:
QUOTE
I'd still like to see the numbers on how many people used P2P file sharing to help them when going out to buy CDs. Were it not for these services, my CD library would probably not be a quarter the size it is.

That's another argument, and although it is most likely true, file-sharing is still illegal. I actually agree with what you're saying, and have done the same myself. Few people will just buy a CD from a band they're not familiar with unless they've heard at least something off of it first. If you download a song and don't like it, I bet you deleted it. If you liked it, you probably bought the CD. That's how many people treat P2P. What the RIAA overlooks, or perhaps doesn't care about, are the legal uses of P2P. Sharing of non-protected content, chatting, or sharing with the artist's permission. There are a number of new bands on indei labels that share their own music in an effort to get people interested. They more traditional ways of getting their music out isn't always available to them, even if for financial reasons.
Then again, the RIAA views these indie artists as competition. To them, an even better reason to shut down as many P2P networks as possible.
You also have to wonder what the RIAA expects the long-term repurcussions will be of their activity. Suing your own customers, the very people who provide your income, is probably not the best way to stay in business.
What the industry needs to do is to move forward and find a way to make money off of this. When radio was new, they cried- how could they compete, people can now hear music for free! Then there were 8-track recorders- now people can record the free music off the radio! Then the introduction of the home video recorder- people will tape movies off of TV, they'll never buy another one. Through all this, the recording industry tried to ban all these technologies, but off of each one they found a way to make money instead. How much money each year do you think the movie industry makes from Blockbuster rentals alone?
However, with P2P and internet radio this is the first time that the industry has tried to sue their customers. They fail to remember that they are not the only source of music in the world.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
ChocolateFilk 
  Posted: 21-Oct-2005, 08:25 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Knight of the Round Table
*******

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 151
Joined: 12-Oct-2001
ZodiacElder

Realm: San Diego Area

male





QUOTE
The problem I have with most of the online purchase servicesis that you're more limited with usage restrictions than you are if you buy the actual CD. Most limit the number of times it can be copied as well as what formats it can be converted to.

With Itunes you can burn the songs you buy onto a CD. Once you do that, you can rip them off again and they are free of any restrictions. The 5 songs I bought on Itunes are ones where I was not willing to buy a complete CD just to get one song. I much rather have the CD then a download, but sometimes a download is a better choice.
QUOTE

For those interested, this link will help you determine if a label is a member of the RIAA or not. It's one that I use as a factor in determining whethr I'll buy a CD or not. http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/

Thanks for the link, I will definitely make use of it.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website               
Top
subhuman 
Posted: 23-Oct-2005, 04:18 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 418
Joined: 16-Oct-2005
ZodiacWillow

Realm: 127.0.0.1

male





Sorry, but this one is on the topic and almost had me rolling on the floor. A satire on the next action the RIAA is expected to take. There's a celtic tie-in when you get to the last paragraph:
QUOTE
In addition, RIAA lawyers said they were hoping to get a court order to exhume the bodies of Scottish physicist James Clerk-Maxwell, who developed the theory of electromagnetic waves and Guglielmo Marconi, who discovered and harnessed wireless radio in order to sue both corpses for unfair business practices.


Read the whole article here: http://radio.about.com/library/weekly/aa082603a.htm

Once again, I mention that it's a satire.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
CelticRadio 
Posted: 23-Oct-2005, 08:31 AM
Quote Post

Member is Online



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 8,266
Joined: 23-Sep-2001
ZodiacOak

Realm: Boston, MA

male





Forgive me if this was already mentioned, but the latest I read was that even Microsoft and Apple were very unhappy with the RIAA and the fact that they (RIAA) wants downloads to be priced $1.49 (US).

Apparently, they feel people are only buying the songs they want and that is unacceptable to them because they are not selling the whole album and the price increase will offset those loses.

It is good to see Microsoft/Apple atleast with a little consumer interest, but they probably know that $1.49 will not fly against .99.


I would love to do an audit and determine if Celtic musicians are getting royalty payments because of Highlander Radio.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website My Photo Album               View my Facebook Profile.View my Linked-In Profile.View my Google plus Profile.View my Twitter Profile.View My Space Profile.View my YouTube Profile.
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 








Celtic RadioTM broadcasts through Live365.com and StreamLicensing.com which are officially licensed under SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SOCAN.
2014 Celtic Radio Network, Highlander Radio, Celtic Moon, Celtic Dance, Ye O' Celtic Pub and Celt-Rock-Radio.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.
Celtic Graphics 2014, Cari Buziak


Link to CelticRadio.net!
Link to CelticRadio.net
View Broadcast Status and Statistics!

Best Viewed With IE 8.0 (1680 x 1050 Resolution), Javascript & Cookies Enabled.


[Home] [Top]

Celtic Hearts Gallery | Celtic Mates Dating | My Celtic Friends | Celtic Music Radio | Family Heraldry | Medival Kingdom | Top Celtic Sites | Web Celt Blog | Video Celt