Audio streams and copyright

Hi all, (first post)
At just under a week old and being involved in web based audio stuff in my RL I was just wondering if all these audio streams I've been enjoying are actually licensed in any way or are most people being really naughty and playing them anyway?

Technically they are web streams and attact a license fee depending on the country you live in.

Also does anyone actually offer a 'by the hour' streaming service for us fledgling DJ's and presenters. if not I might actually look into at a SL business.

Your thought please and apologies if this has been covered somewhere else or this post is in the wrong place. I'm still finding my feet. (Quite literally sometimes!!!)

Nigel

ssssh, we are hiding from the riaa...

I have all the info on this... but honestly, am too lazy to type it all out. But basically it's currently a very grey area, and the RIAA or ASCAP will not want to deal with a small stream with some listeners, especially if they themselves don't know if it's legal or not. Basically, the more money you make because of the stream show, the more you are at risk with being contacted about legalities.

--

check out Slipstream Audio inworld for a by the hour stream rental.

Any other stream, music, dj questions I'll be happy to help you out in world.

This what I love about this community. There's always someone willing to lend a hand. I'll look you up sometime soon.

Thanks

Yes, there are a few. I can't remember the name of the in-world service I use, but the person who runs it is named Jamie Otis. He does rent relays in blocks - 4 hours each, I think. I just rented a relay for a month - it cost me 4000L and it allows me to stream to 100 people at 128k 44.1 stereo. Renting for a month is about the same as renting four blocks, so it is a fantastic deal. I have used it for live performances and for streaming music onto my land, and it's rock solid. For this service you must contact Jamie to rent the relay, but I have also found one that is automated. Again, I can't remember the name of the service.

Thanks. Should I be worried that your reply was your 666th post?

Ironically I show up to work today and I have a hefty ASCAP invoice waiting on my desk. ARG!

Anyway, yeah, I have both the ASCAP and RIAA liscences for my RL work... I've read both of the current contracts... and they slightly touch on streaming music, but it has much more to do with an established radio show with a lot of listeners, and advertizers, etc. They really don't know what the hell they're doing.... but, you should be fine playing some tunes into SL.

Basically, my thoughts are that it depends on how you view the status of your land in SL. If we agree that the land and any structures upon that land in Sl are ours, owned by us, then we are still fulfilling the terms of copyright law in most countries - i.e. the audio still falls into the category of "home use", just as if you were playing a CD loudly in your own RL home.
However, this is a thornier legal area than one would imagine, because one can argue that nothing in SL is owned by the residents and everything in SL is owned by Linden Labs. In which case, we are broadcasting copyright audio into what is essentially a public space, despite being privately owned (e.g a shop or restaurant in Rl would meet the same criteria), therefore we breach both US and UK copyright law. Personally, I favour the view that land in SL is owned by Linden Labs (and I suspect the SL terms and conditions say as much) and therefore, yes, streaming audio where the copyright is owned by someonelse counts as "public performance" and therefore breaches that copyright.

Man, I should have been a lawyer.

I would LOVE to see someone defend their right to play music on their SL island as 'Home Use'.

Yes, Linden Labs own the land but as citizens we technically pay rent monthly the same way we rent houses in RL. No-one is going to stop you playing music in your 'home' just because you choose to rent rather than buy.

This is now a whole new topic

This is a very hard question. If you only stream now and then, every few days, not every day, for 20-30 ppl. you probably owe about 1-2 USD per month to the RIAA/ASCAP or a similar organization.

The thing is, for them to even book that income, check a contract, file it, it probably costs tens of USD's. Even reading a contract, checking information, signing the contract probably costs them tens of USD's or more.

The music licensing service seemingly doesn't like to deal with 'small fish'. They can't say 'if you're a small fish, 'steal' the music', but every word they write seems to indicate this.

So yes, this is a hard question. They probably won't sue you for 2 USDs. Just filing the suit would costs hundreds of USDs.

The ONLY and best legal option seems to be to use a relay service that pays royalties. This is probably what the RIAA wants, too, they like dealing with easy, bigger customers, but not small ones.

I, for one, think this is a deficiency of the legal system.

It's even worse: let's say you hold a conference or exhibition in SL and you provide 'background music'.

Which law applies?
The royalties for playing music at exhibitions?
Or the internet radio broadcast royalties?

They'd probably say the radio broadcast ones, but I'd say it's an exhibition, even if virtual.

A further argument that would suggest that we are broadcasting publicly is the fact that there is no way to stop people who are not on your land, or not even in Second Life at all, from listening to your audio stream. You may not be advertising its availability to the public, but it's still out there on the net.

Unfortunately, the license terms for the relay or licensing services that are even semi-affordable for individuals (the ones I'm familiar with are Live365, which is a full relay or hosting service for music, and LoudCity, which just handles licensing and leaves you to find your own stream provider) require that all listeners enter by way of the service's web site. This makes it impossible to use them as audio servers for Second Life, at least if you actually comply with their license.

I think what the RIAA really wants is for there not to be any small customers. Big business wants broadcasting to be restricted to big businesses; they don't want to have to compete with a million microbroadcasters who might actually play music other than the stuff that the big record companies want to sell.

(In the case of Live365, the restriction applies only to its personal broadcasting services. They also offer more expensive professional hosting servces that don't have the website restriction, but they're too expensive for somebody who just wants to entertain a few people in SL.)

Yep, I agree! The RIAA and similar organizations should be dragged to court by abusing their monopoly.

BTW, even LoudCity is minimum 20 USD/month. Which is a joke, considering a casual radio player person would only owe about 2 USD/month. That's serious overcharging.