Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Canadian Music Industry Copyright Class Action Settled

Unknown Lamer posted more than 3 years ago | from the too-big-to-pirate dept.

Music 99

limber writes "The largest Canadian copyright class action suit has been settled for $50 million. The offenders? The four labels comprising the Canadian Recording Industry Association — EMI, Sony Music, Universal Music, and Warner Music. Ahem." The terms of the settlement are a compromise — anyone with works on the pending list can receive compensation while the music industry is absolved of further liability. The two major Canadian licensing agencies (CMRRA and SODRAC) will be tasked with improving the licensing process to prevent future abuse.

cancel ×

99 comments

Good luck with that. (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299544)

The CRIA has had years to pay these artists. Why would they start now?

Also notice how this is less than 1% of what the CRIA actually owes its artists. Settlements like this only encourage them to keep stiffing their artists.

Orphan works (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300040)

The CRIA has had years to pay these artists.

Which is difficult if the artist cannot be contacted.

Re:Orphan works (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300106)

If the artist can't be contacted, they can't file a lawsuit either. I don't think we're talking about orphan works here.

All our base are belong to whom? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300132)

If the artist can't be contacted, they can't file a lawsuit either.

A copyright owner can be reclusive up until the moment that the copyright owner is ready to sue. Or a copyright owner can die or go out of business, and it might not be feasible to trace to whom the copyright has passed. Quick question: Who owns the copyright in Zero Wing, a 1989 scrolling shooter video game developed by Toaplan?

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (5, Insightful)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300156)

So I guess the thing to do would be to not sell works when it is unclear how to do so legally. Especially when you're constantly suing people for copyright infringement.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300794)

Indeed. If you wish to claim that the current copyright law is morally just and should be supported then it's more than a little hypocritical to be the biggest abuser.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301510)

So I guess the thing to do would be to not sell works when it is unclear how to do so legally.

In which case copyright is utterly failing "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts", as the constitution of Canada's neighbor to the south and west puts it.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36302852)

Actually it just goes to prove that copyright lasts too long...If a good faith effort is made to locate the holder and no one says Hey over here...that is my work...the work should be dropped into the public domain.

My flameproof pants are ready, but then I am an AC anyway.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36306092)

Wow, you mean Canada's copyright implementation fails to fulfill the mandate of the constitution of another country? Well, we had better let the CRIA have at everyone's catalogue, no holds barred.

What mandate underlies Canadian copyright? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36307184)

Wow, you mean Canada's copyright implementation fails to fulfill the mandate of the constitution of another country?

First let me clarify: Nowhere did I intend to imply that a foreign country's constitution was the basis underlying Canadian copyright. But the framers of the 1982 constitution had to be aware of its neighbor's mandate. In fact, what mandate underlies Canadian copyright? #91 gives none [justice.gc.ca] . And the country that has such a mandate likewise has an orphan works problem.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300958)

>>>A copyright owner can be reclusive up until the moment that the copyright owner is ready to sue.

That certainly sounds like a valid excuse. NOW - What excuse do you have for Canadian RIAA not paying artists like Celine Dion, Alanis Morisette, Sarah McLachlan, and so on? The truth is that RIAA didn't pay because they didn't want to pay. They wanted to use these songs on "Greatest Hits" and other compilation albums for free, rather than pay the wages due.

i.e. They are the very "thieves" they accuse us and piratebay of being. RIAA=record execs==Hypocritical bastards.

Sound recording vs. composition copyright (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301574)

They wanted to use these songs on "Greatest Hits" and other compilation albums for free, rather than pay the wages due.

What wages due? Are there standard rates for licensing the right to make and sell phonorecords of a three- to five-minute nondramatic musical sound recording? I thought mechanical licenses were only for the composition, not the recording. If an artist switched labels part-way through his or her career, it's possible that the artist's former label said "not at any price". Or an artist's former label may have been caught up in , leaving the copyright ownership of the artist's early recordings unclear. In this case, it becomes no different from the Zero Wing example.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36302780)

There is no "-1 Disagree" moderation option. That's what "reply" is for.

It's cute how you continue to cling to the false idea that you're being downmodded because I disagree with you.

Here's a hint, I agree with your positions. I agree with your positions, and I am downmodding you.

Why?

You. Are. A. Troll. And you're trollish behavior is doing more harm than good to the positions you claim to believe in.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36302162)

Square Enix?

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (1)

blind monkey 3 (773904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36302270)

If the artist can't be contacted, they can't file a lawsuit either.

A copyright owner can be reclusive up until the moment that the copyright owner is ready to sue. Or a copyright owner can die or go out of business, and it might not be feasible to trace to whom the copyright has passed. Quick question: Who owns the copyright in Zero Wing, a 1989 scrolling shooter video game developed by Toaplan?

Since you are defending their actions, I'd like a little clarification (a genuine request to get both sides of the equation).
I assume you are not saying that it is okay to distribute works if you don't know who the copyright owner is.
I also expect the distributers in question had these "products" in their portfolio. My misgivings are:
I am not aware of Canadian law but here in Australia before someone can sue they have to make an attempt at getting the payment (letter of demand with accompanying documantation), isn't that the case in Canada? If it is, why did they not pay when presented with a request for payment (I feel very cynical in saying that they knew their legal team could drag it out and end up paying a fraction of the amount so I hope you do have an explanation)?
Now that they have been contacted by the copyright owners, where is all the money?
Shouldn't the distributer have been keeping the money in an account and not spending it? Shouldn't their balance sheet have this money listed as debts to be paid - i.e. bring down their profits?
Shouldn't it be reasonable to expect full payment?
These are some of the companies that extrapolate very large figures when calculating losses "due to theft", should they not pay interest on the money they have been using? I know over here we can claim interest.
Is it not reasonable to expect that there is a copyright owner?
The more I think about it, the more I see wrong with what has occurred (except for the distributer, they seem to have come out of it quite cheaply) to argue that "they couldn't find them" and only pay 1% of what is owing is very disingenuous in my opinion - I would not be able to get away with that argument, but then I suppose I don't have their resources or lawyers... sigh, I guess the envy is showing.

Re:All our base are belong to whom? (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36302402)

Who owns the copyright in Zero Wing, a 1989 scrolling shooter video game developed by Toaplan?

I would assume that all your copyright are belong to us...

Re:Orphan works (3, Insightful)

codegen (103601) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300382)

Which is difficult if the artist cannot be contacted.

Some of the artists on the list included Beyonce and Bruce Springsteen. Not exactly artists that are hard to find, that is if they bothered to try...

Re:Orphan works (2)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#36303216)

Which is difficult if the artist cannot be contacted.

Some of the artists on the list included Beyonce and Bruce Springsteen. Not exactly artists
that are hard to find, that is if they bothered to try...

The latter, at least, lives in New Jersey. They sent a courier with a cheque, but he turned back as he was afraid of getting a Snooki on him.

Re:Orphan works (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300650)

Fuck that. In many cases involved in this case, the artist involved is a relatively big name. Many cases of the abuse are to put out Top 20 compilations, etc. The record labels knew fucking well how to get in touch with the artists. They didn't simply because it would mean they'd have to actually pay them when they found them.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299562)

Why do I think this is going to trickle down and hurt the little guy no matter how it turned out?

I hope... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299600)

They are only screwing shitty artists like Celine Dion, Anne Murry, and Bryan Adams. Come to think of it, I don't think there is a Canadian recording artist that doesn't suck. I'm finding it hard to give a shit about this at all.

Re:I hope... (2)

mini me (132455) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299670)

What about Nickleback? Oh wait, that just reenforces your point.

Re:I hope... (1)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299692)

Yes, that's all we have, the same way the US has only produced Britney Spears, Limp Bizkit and Barry Manilow.

Re:I hope... (1)

WhirlwindMonk (1975382) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299952)

You forgot Hannah Montana.

Re:I hope... (2)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301400)

You forgot Hannah Montana.

I know I had until you brought her up. Thanks a lot!!!

Re:I hope... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300976)

Hey don't slam on Manilow. I may not appreciate his music much, but he's got a lot of talent and has had quite a career:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Manilow_discography [wikipedia.org]

1977 Grammy – I Write The Songs – Song of the Year (award went to the song's writer Bruce Johnston)
1977 Emmy for Outstanding Special – Comedy, Variety or Music – The Barry Manilow Special
1977 Special Tony Award – Barry Manilow on Broadway
1978 American Music Awards – Best Pop/Rock Male Artist
1979 Grammy – Copacabana Best Pop Male Vocal Performance
1979 American Music Awards – Best Pop/Rock Male Artist
1980 American Music Awards – Best Pop/Rock Male Artist
2002 Songwriter's Hall of Fame
2006 Emmy for Outstanding Individual Performance in a Variety or Music Program – Barry Manilow: Music And Passion
2007 RIAA – Plaque commemorating worldwide record sales of 75 million
2009 Clio Awards Honorary award for prior work with commercial jingles
2009 Inducted into the Hit Parade Hall of Fame

Re:I hope... (2)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301368)

He's had a very successful carreer. He obviously won many awards. He's still Barry Manilow.

Re:I hope... (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36305464)

Yeah, pretty much every country, every genre, every era, etc, has some good stuff and some junk.
(Also, AC forgot to make fun of Bieber. :P)

As for _good_ Canadian musicians, I'll mention Great Big Sea, good stuff on the lighter side of the Irish/rock fusion genre.

Re:I hope... (1)

ppanon (16583) | more than 3 years ago | (#36305982)

Tom Cochran, Bruce Coburn, Royal Wood...

Re:I hope... (1)

ppanon (16583) | more than 3 years ago | (#36306062)

BTO, Leonard Cohen, Gordon Lightfoot, Murray McLauchlan, Joni Mitchell, Neil Young, The Guess Who, The Payola$, Sarah McLachlan are more than just overproduced manufactured successes. They've had major influences.

Go listen to K.D. Lang sing Cohen's Hallelujah at the Olympic ceremony and tell me it doesn't give you chills.

Heck, even like some Blue Rodeo. And while I think Rush is overrated, New Orleans is sinking is a decent (and somewhat prophetic) blues tune.

Re:I hope... (1)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36308186)

Isn't New Orleans Is Sinking by Tragically Hip, not Rush?

Re:I hope... (1)

hipp5 (1635263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299972)

Come to think of it, I don't think there is a Canadian recording artist that doesn't suck.

Arcade Fire?

Re:I hope... (1)

Script Cat (832717) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300184)

Arcade fire isn't that good they just have a good memorable band name. There are other bands in the same style whos music is far superior to Arcade fire. But sadly those band names elude me right now for some reason. So that makes Arcade fire awsome.

Re:I hope... (1)

Japher (887294) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300560)

I thought obscure names increased hipster cred.

Re:I hope... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300042)

Nothing about this suit was specific to Canadian artists, only Canadian labels, which hold the Canadian distribution rights to artists from around the world. The lead plaintiff was Chet Baker, who was born in Oklahoma and never had any sort of Canadian residency.

And yes, you are right, Canadian music is fucking terrible. And the guy who said Arcade Fire should go kill himself immediately.

Re:I hope... (3, Insightful)

UncleTogie (1004853) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300110)

Yeah, but they gave us Rush, too, so we can forgive 'em for Ms. Dion at least.

Re:I hope... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300354)

"I don't think there is a Canadian recording artist that doesn't suck"

just off the top of my head ...

Neil Young
Leonard Cohen
Tragically Hip
Loreena McKennitt
KD Lang
Ian Tyson
Barenaked Ladies
Tom Cochrane
Minglewood Band
Powder Blues
Stampeders
Chilliwack
Anne Beverly Brown
Tom Phillips
Mae Moore
Lynn Miles
Buffy Sue St. Marie
Stan Rogers
Gordon Lightfoot
etc.

Re:I hope... (1)

kevinmenzel (1403457) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300752)

Damn, of the stuff I know on that list, it's stuff I like... for an AC, that's a pretty informative post! (On the one day I don't have like 15 mod points...)

Wow you left out the good ones. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36301018)

Anyone who omits Rush (whether knowingly or ignorant) has questionable taste.

to continue:

Triumph
Coney Hatch
Bryan Adams
April Wine
Pat Travers
BTO

Re:Wow you left out the good ones. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36303860)

Rush??? A guidepost of good taste?

rotflmao

yes there's freedom of expression and boy, are you using it

Re:Wow you left out the good ones. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36329060)

Devin Townsend, and anything he's been in contact with.

Re:I hope... (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 3 years ago | (#36306440)

Yep, Loreena McKennitt FTW!

Re:I hope... (1)

strength_of_10_men (967050) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301126)

All bow to The Weakerthans... who only bow to Triumph.

Not all good... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299614)

Posting anonymously from work...
 
 

The two major Canadian licensing agencies (CMRRA and SODRAC) will be tasked with improving the licensing process to prevent future abuse.

Why do I get the feeling that means, instead of "the CMRRA and SODRAC will ensure the music industry doesn't make this mistake again", as I'm sure they'd like us to believe, that actually equates to "the CMRRA and SODRAC will ensure stricter copyright legislation so that the music industry has an easier time of controlling things and screwing over people"?... Why do I get the feeling the music industry actually won and the people of Canada got screwed?...

Re:Not all good... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299742)

Neither CMRRA nor SODRAC are governement bodies; they'll have to lobby MPs like all the other cabals to get their restrictions in place.

Re:Not all good... (1)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301146)

But I bet they have priority access...

Re:Not all good... (1)

isopropanol (1936936) | more than 3 years ago | (#36302340)

We have a majority government. They only have to lobby the Heritage Minister.

So... (5, Insightful)

Ecuador (740021) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299632)

So, for willfully and illegally selling 300,000 works, the recording companies paid just $50 million, or $166 per song. And careful, that is per song, NOT per copy! So they are most likely giving a fraction of their illegally gotten gains - forget about any punitive damages, they probably even get to keep a lot of the stolen money!
Next time you are sharing a song online, make sure a) you make money of it b) you are a big corp.

Re:So... (1)

Whalou (721698) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299944)

Especially b)...

Re:So... (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299964)

This is news to you?
If you commit a crime always go big. If your mom and pop shop dumps waste in the river you are going to jail, if you are union carbide all of Bhopal India can be your waste dump.

Re:So... (2)

dstyle5 (702493) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299970)

I wonder if they will "pay" them in iTunes credits and free CDs like every other company that settles in class actions and pays with products instead of money. Or being a Canadian settlement perhaps the terms were Tim Horton's gift cards and Canadian Tire money.

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300656)

It's not so much A as it is B. It would have been interesting had the damages been assessed similar to the Jamie Thomas verdict ($80,000 per song). $80,000 * 300,000 = $24 billion. I'd have loved to have seen them squirm over having to pay a $24 billion judgement against them and see them crying about how unfair it was and how it would bankrupt them. Granted, there wouldn't be any cognitive dissonance to burst. They really do think that infringement by the public should be punished by huge fines (and, I'm sure they'd love to add in, jail terms) while infringement by them should be punished by a vicious finger shaking and a fine not to exceed ten percent of the profits they made off of the infringement.

Legal precedent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36305466)

If I were being sued by the RIAA/MPAA for copyright infringement, this case would now be my reference point for what the damages per song should be.

If the companies being the *AAs think that $160/song is all they should pay then why should Jamie Thomas pay more?

I think that this case has put a big hole in a lot of damages cases.

Re:Legal precedent (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36306382)

Unfortunately, a legal precedent set in Canada does not usually apply in the USA. Otherwise this would have worked nicely the other way around, and $80,000 fine per work would have worked as a precedent.

That said, even though there's no formal precedent in the legal sense, saying 'these people who are suing me claim that the song is worth less than $160/song, so this should be the maximum damages' may work.

Re:So... (4, Informative)

Solandri (704621) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301142)

Comparison to:

Limewire settlement: $10,808 per song, 65x more. 300,000 infringements -> $3.24 billion
Joel Tenenbaum: $22,500 per song, 135x more. 300,000 infringements -> $6.75 billion
Jammie Thomas-Rasset 2010: $62,500 per song, 375x more. 300,000 infringements -> $18.75 billion

The scales of justice seem badly in need of calibration.

Re:So... (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36301564)

Could it be a Canadian settlement has something to do with this? After all, the Canadian dollar is now worth more than the US dollar, so some adjustment to your figures is required.

It isn't like the US dollar is some kind of international standard any more.

Besides, US music is probably worth less in Canada anyway.

Re:So... (1)

dryeo (100693) | more than 3 years ago | (#36304290)

Just because the Canadian dollar has gone from 0.70 US$ to 1.03 US$ does not change the fact that we pay 30% more for American goods (before taxes).

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36305010)

They should have been sued in a USA court. 300,000 x 100,000 x (estimated copies sold) would bring a nice punitive fine which could be used to help promote local Canadian talent...

Love this ... (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299704)

The record companies commit wholesale copyright infringement, and take the stance they should be allowed to do it and will settle the costs later.

The rest of us download a fucking Brittany Spears song and they want to sue us for eleventy trillion dollars.

I think it's time to start feeding recording executives to wild dogs -- they want draconian laws to make sure we can't do anything, but they just walk around them and pretend they didn't do anything wrong. Arrogant bastards.

I've said it before, if they keep extending this "copyright levy" to everything under the sun, I'm going to start pirating on a large scale. I'm already paying for it, I might as well get my money's worth.

Re:Love this ... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299852)

The rest of us download a fucking Brittany Spears song and they want to sue us for eleventy trillion dollars.

To be fair, you need to be punished for downloading Britney Spears. And for spelling her name wrong.

And I need to be punished for knowing you spelled it wrong...

Re:Love this ... (1)

N0Man74 (1620447) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300582)

To be fair, you need to be punished for downloading Britney Spears.

Isn't hearing it punishment enough? Even if you don't listen to it, isn't the shame of possessing it punishment enough?

Re:Love this ... (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300872)

And for spelling her name wrong.

It's a reasonable mistake. That's the correct spelling for that other dog. [wikipedia.org]

A perfectly understandable confusion.

Re:Love this ... (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 3 years ago | (#36305678)

The rest of us download a fucking Brittany Spears song and they want to sue us for eleventy trillion dollars.

To be fair, you need to be punished for downloading Britney Spears. And for spelling her name wrong.

And I need to be punished for knowing you spelled it wrong...

By Brittany Spears. Covered in hot grits.

Re:Love this ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299900)

What have you got against wild dogs? That would for sure be cruelty to animals as these scumbags are festering postules of blight and disease on the planet even when they are alive, and not much less so if they were dead.

Re:Love this ... (1)

PIBM (588930) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300266)

The only way to be sure would be to nuke them to orbit ?

Re:Love this ... (2)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299930)

The rest of us download a fucking Brittany Spears song and they want to sue us for eleventy trillion dollars.

Isn't listening to Brittney Spears punishment enough?

Re:Love this ... (4, Funny)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300094)

Since this is a story about a Canadian lawsuit, by Canadian Content rules since this joke should be about Celene Dion or Avril Lavigne.

Re:Love this ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300402)

Fair enough: you should be punished for even mentioning Celine Dion.

Re:Love this ... (2)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300670)

That's my stance whenever they make noise about bringing the "mandatory copyright fees" to the US for everything (especially ISP bills). I don't pirate music, but if I'm going to be charged $5 a month in "just in case you are a copyright pirate" fees, I might as well become a copyright pirate. Those fees will create more pirates then they "cure" (for lack of a better word).

Re:Love this ... (1)

metacell (523607) | more than 3 years ago | (#36305688)

Shouldn't you be allowed to download legally if you pay a fee for it?

Re:Love this ... (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#36319348)

You would think so, but I'd be willing to bet that the RIAA/MPAA would want it both ways. They'd want to be able to go after those who share out music (keep it illegal) *AND* get money from people just in case they share/download music. As it is, they get money from the sales of "Music" CD-Rs (same as regular CD-Rs but with an added RIAA tax on them to guard against people using them for non-legal purposes) but still pursue lawsuits.

Re:Love this ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36306150)

Brittany Spears

So you'r the one! [google.com]

It's Pryottaney Spears, dammit! ;)

Re:Love this ... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36306390)

While it's interesting data, why does Google file it under 'jobs'? Are they hiring someone to manually fix typos in search queries?

The best counter-point (5, Informative)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299724)

Every time the **AAs get up in front of government or the public to claim "support for the artists" this situation and others need to be brought up plainly and clearly. I know that like many here, those arguments made me laugh, then made me sick and now make me angry. They are simply lying with impunity on this matter and need to be taken to account. I would love for them to be questioned before the US congress to see if we can get some truth and/or perjury from them. That won't and can't happen fairly, though, as long as they are major contributors to both big parties and to nearly every elected official in office today.

Re:The best counter-point (0)

alienzed (732782) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300008)

yeah but everything deserves to exist. The dinosaurs got huge and couldn't cope with change but they are still around right?

Re:The best counter-point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36301452)

Every time the **AAs get up in front of government or the public to claim "support for the artists" this situation and others need to be brought up plainly and clearly.

The **AA are USA based, this is a story about Canada. Can't you tell the difference?

Re:The best counter-point (3, Insightful)

Gnavpot (708731) | more than 3 years ago | (#36302012)

Every time the **AAs get up in front of government or the public to claim "support for the artists" this situation and others need to be brought up plainly and clearly.

The **AA are USA based, this is a story about Canada. Can't you tell the difference?

From the summary:
"The offenders? The four labels comprising the Canadian Recording Industry Association â" EMI, Sony Music, Universal Music, and Warner Music."

Oh, yes. Those labels are certainly local Canadian companys with no connection to the US labels whatsoever.

RIPPED OFF (5, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#36299884)

50 million is a ripoff compared to the billions owed in backpay. That's equivalent to your boss saying, "I'll pay your $50 an hour," waiting years for your paycheck, and then he hands you a measly $5 an hour and says "Oops sorry." I would not have accepted it.

Worse - Since there are lawyers involved, the 50 million will probably shrink to 20 million that has to be distributed amongst the ~1 million singers owed money.

And these nonpaying a-holes in RIAA screw the singers, but they have the nerve to demand WE the customers pay for every single song we make a copy of - $1 if we download it, $1 if we burn it to a CD-R, $1 if we duplicate it across a 2nd PC, and so on.

GRRRR.

(I am a little bitter. Can you tell?)

Re:RIPPED OFF (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36301106)

(I am a little sock puppet. Can you tell?)

troll detected... mod down on sight. :3

Re:RIPPED OFF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36301808)

troll detected... mod down on sight. :3

Ok. Have a Nice Day.

Re:RIPPED OFF (1)

nursebebo (2220612) | more than 3 years ago | (#36306426)

Cool info thanks. Regarding this new version 2.9 it’s normal to take some time to get used to the new tools.CNA Classes [onlinecnaclass.com]

It's not about supporting the artists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36299994)

It's not about supporting the artists it's about supporting the politicians. The AA's never miss those payments!!!

To class or not to class (1)

Cigarra (652458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300114)

"The suit, which has not been given class action status..."

Doesn't even the poster read TFA anymore?

Re:To class or not to class (1)

canajin56 (660655) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300970)

It was a class action suit. This settlement immunizes them from further lawsuits. The first link is out of date. In 2009 it hadn't YET been granted class action status by a judge, but it was still a class action lawsuit even then, just not approved yet.

Re:To class or not to class (1)

Phasma Felis (582975) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300986)

Did you read the *other* FA? There's two of them, and the one you're quoting is a year and a half old.

the parasites profit, artists and fans suffer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300138)

modern music has become a corporate commodity, there's no creativity or art left, it's nothing but overpriced crap

An open letter to Canada (3, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300396)

Dear Canada,

      Please stop ending acronyms with an A. It's confusing. We don't know whether you're saying CMRReh, or whether its real name is CMRRA.

And no, saying CMRRAeh doesn't help. There might, for all we know (not that we care - Ed) be a CMRRAA.

Put it another way, how can you distinguish these guys [aaa.com] from these guys? [aa.com]

Re:An open letter to Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36300574)

We have the CAA, not the AAA, And the AA is British.

Re:An open letter to Canada (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 3 years ago | (#36303252)

We have the CAA, not the AAA, And the AA is British.

I think they are non-denomenational [aa.org] .

Re:An open letter to Canada (1)

Isaac Remuant (1891806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36303496)

It definitely sounds like Robert Heinlein's martian names in Double star [wikipedia.org] .

Re:An open letter to Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36305718)

Somebody should call the Anonymous Americans Against Acronym Abuse (AAAAA).

So what are we missing? (2)

Zelucifer (740431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36300596)

~$6 billiion to ~$50 million, either there's a huge chunk of information missing, a large percentage of the represented class is going to opt out, or something is up. Obviously the vast majority of the class has no dire need for a short-changed payment, and can stand to sue individually, or as a group in order to get multiples of this settlement.

Re:So what are we missing? .....this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36303796)

The artists asked for the unpaid royalties AND maximum copyright statutory damages per song. The settlement was unpaid royalties and much less than the maximum statutory damages. Oh and the 4 big corps have to pay the artists legal fees.

IANAL Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36301500)

Is it possible to bring up a settlement like this in US court cases as a type of precedent?

Re:IANAL Question (1)

Repossessed (1117929) | more than 3 years ago | (#36303638)

Not a lawyer either but, yes. It wouldn't have the same standing as a US case, but US courts do consider foreign court rulings (in fact, our system is based on British rulings), especially if there aren't many US rulings on the topic.

There's the problems that A) I doubt there's a paucity of rulings on companies not paying their employees, I've never had a job with a major corporation where I actually got payed what I was told I'd be payed (and have my own damned settlements for less than what I was owed in the first place). And B) this is a settlement, I'm relatively sure settlements don't count much for precedent, though other rulings (IE, whether or not to make it a class action suit) from within the case might apply.

Vote Pirate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36305168)

If you see, as I do, that the RIAA, et al are out of freaking control, then join the Pirate Party, as I have. We don't want to steal as the overlords would have you believe. We just want the corporations to play fair. Look us up.

Re:Vote Pirate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36340686)

If you see, as I do, that the RIAA, et al are out of freaking control, then join the Anarchists, as I have. We don't want to steal as the overlords would have you believe. We just want the corporations to play fair. Look us up.

More than 3 Strikes. They should be Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36305776)

Looks like more than Three Strikes for these guys. They should no longer be allowed to use the Internet. And while we are at it, how about the Death Penalty for Corporations and jail terms for their CEOs.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...