Speaking of Iron Triangles…

by on July 13, 2006 · 4 comments

Radley at the Cato blog notes that Majority Leader Frist is making sure that the telecom Christmas tree has a present for the RIAA under it:

Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) quietly has gone to bat for the Recording Industry Association of America and other groups to make sure that a key industry priority was included in the massive overhaul of telecommunications laws that the panel approved just before the July Fourth recess, several Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee aides confirmed. The provision Frist helped place prevents satellite radio listeners from being able to record, store and rearrange music they receive from popular subscription services such as XM and Sirius. Music industry officials say that such copying would cheat labels and artists out of fees that consumers otherwise would pay when buying music on CDs or from online music services. But the push by the record labels is rankling radio, electronics and consumer groups, who argue that listeners should be able to store songs for personal use as long as they are not selling or passing them along. Several Commerce Committee aides confirmed that Frist had made it clear that he would allow the telecom bill to come to the floor only if it included the measure, which is commonly called the “audio flag” provision. [:] Beyond what appears to be a home-state interest in the issue, aides and lobbyists close to the debate noted that former Frist Chief of Staff Mitch Bainwol now heads the record labels’ lobby, the RIAA.

The more I hear about the telecom bill, the more I root for gridlock.

  • http://dr-flippy.livejournal.com/ Lewis Baumstark

    The more I hear about this, the more insane it gets. The music companies understandably want to curtail recording off of, e.g., XM. The proper response would be to not license their music to XM unless XM halts such recording. But they’re too afraid to do that, too afraid XM will simply drop them. Instead, they short-circuit the market process and get the government to force XM to play ball.

  • http://dr-flippy.livejournal.com/ Lewis Baumstark

    The more I hear about this, the more insane it gets. The music companies understandably want to curtail recording off of, e.g., XM. The proper response would be to not license their music to XM unless XM halts such recording. But they’re too afraid to do that, too afraid XM will simply drop them. Instead, they short-circuit the market process and get the government to force XM to play ball.

  • Tim Schneider

    I might be wrong, but I’m pretty sure that the performance licenses that XM has are compulsory. As in, the music industry can’t say no. But music licensing is an absolute morass, so I’m not positive about that. I think it’s part of the AHRA.

    For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t want the music industry to have absolute control over performance rights. The end of cover bands? Or maybe that would be a good thing.

  • Tim Schneider

    I might be wrong, but I’m pretty sure that the performance licenses that XM has are compulsory. As in, the music industry can’t say no. But music licensing is an absolute morass, so I’m not positive about that. I think it’s part of the AHRA.

    For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t want the music industry to have absolute control over performance rights. The end of cover bands? Or maybe that would be a good thing.

Previous post:

Next post: