Randy Picker has an interesting post on potential RIAA legal action against YouTube for posting videos containing copyrighted music:
The 1909 Copyright Act assigned a number of rights to copyright holders. These included the right to print and make copies of the work; to perform the work publicly if the work was a drama; and, for musical compositions, to perform the work “publicly for profit.”
Be clear on what this means. Same piece of paper–sheet music–but different rights depending on use. I could buy sheet music and take it home and sing to my heart’s content, but I could not take it to my restaurant and do so without violating copyright if that counted as a public performance of the music for profit. Was it? Yes, indeed, said the Supreme Court in 1917, in Herbert v. Shanley Co., in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Holmes. Eight years later, a federal appellate court reached the same conclusion for the new mass medium of that day, radio broadcasting.
These are not laws of nature. We could have a rule that said that anyone buying sheet music can use it in any fashion possible, at home or in a restaurant, on the radio or streamed from YouTube. Our original copyright law–enacted in 1790–didn’t say anything about music at all. This is a choice, a choice that some uses are different from others and that copyright holders can appropriately charge different prices for different uses.
The question, I think, is whether the entity “publicly performing” the song is YouTube or the person who uploaded the content. I don’t know the caselaw, but it seems plausible to argue that YouTube is simply a common carrier like my ISP. And it seems like if a kid makes a video of herself singing her favorite Britney Spears song, that wouldn’t be public performance “for profit.”
In any event, Picker’s broader point is right: there’s no law of nature concerning what the precise rules ought to be. If the courts don’t come up with a reasonable solution, Congress can and should step in to clarify the rules.
If Congress does step in, I hope they’ll do so in a way that makes gems like 10 Things I Hate About Commandments possible. Collecting ASCAP royalties every time somebody watches the video probably isn’t economically feasible. And as Picker points out, it’s a great video.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
Comments on this entry are closed.