Hi, The best to do is to read Paul's statements on the i-network list. He is the laywer.
Few remarks nevertheless: the fact that others are doing wrong, is no excuse to do wrong yourself. That goes for anything. As an excuse it will never hold up in court. Sites that stream music owned by others and didnt pay, have been shut down or come to an agreement with the industry before (like last.fm which is now a paid service)So there are example cases of the music industry being unhappy about sites like this. Thing is, you are on the internet. You are broadcasting anywhere in the world. (i think i read the new text of the new copyright law, as it was posted to i- network earlier in the year, and i think this law caters for a body that collects money like the UK Performance Rights body you mention. Dig in the archives i'd recommend. or, again, ask paul) -- rgds, Reinier Battenberg Director Mountbatten Ltd. +256 758 801 749 www.mountbatten.net On Friday 30 July 2010 11:04:30 Badru Ntege (MPP) wrote: > Reinier > > I have not read the act if you have a copy or can direct us to it, please > do However > > Does that act cover the issue of archiving content ??? > > And would this be classified as a broadcast ?? > > > This is not an 'interesting topic', this is copyright infringement. For > > one of > > the radio stations, but definitely also from the artists that are > > played. > > [] > How many of these radio stations are actually paying anything to the > artists that are being played ??? (local and international) > > > And without consent from the copyright holders, this is definitely > > illegal. No > > room for discussion there. > > [] > Some stations might have some kind of consent from local artists but surely > not from the international music which fills our airwaves. > > > [] My point on the "interesting topic is how relevant is the 1964 act to > today ?" > > And exactly which portion of that act would cover what we do. In effect we > archive what has been broadcast and then allow individuals to go back and > listen from their PC's. Most of the acts dealt with what was called > "performance rights" where content was broadcast to a number of people. I > actually was involved in a similar case in the UK in the 90's where we > installed a PBX with a music on hold functionality and the copyright issue > came up. At the time there was no case since the music had been genuinely > bought. The compromise was a small token payment to the UK performance > rights body. > > However I do believe we have no such protection in Uganda. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > LUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > > LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > > All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any > way. --------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ All Archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
