=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

           This E-mail is Sponsored by:   Small Dog Electronics
     --> Specializing in New & Factory Refurbished Apple computers <--
      Surf to <http://www.smalldog.com> Check out our daily specials!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=1074

Webcasters get a reprieve from grasping RIAA
By ron carlson, Insanely Great Mac
October 8th 2002

The US Congress is considering a bill to limit the how much Hollywood can charge 
webcasters

The Register reports that the US House of Representatives passed a bill Monday that 
would give financial relief to small-scale Internet broadcasters threatened by the 
grasping maw of the music industry and private pit bull, the RIAA.

According to the mavens of digital dish at The Register, rather than the industry's 
preferred per-play fee, the bill would assess costs based on a webcaster's revenues. 
Those making less than $250,000 per year would pay 10 percent of revenue or 7 percent 
of expenses, whichever is greater. Those making between $250,000 and $500,000 would 
pay 12 percent of revenue or 7 percent of expenses, whichever is greater. 

As we reported earlier this year, the Library of Congress decided Webcasters should 
pay $0.07 per track per listener. The industry whinged that the fee was well below 
'market value' as they liked to reckon it, but small Webcasters like college stations 
claimed it would wipe them out. 

The new bill will not affect big Web outlets like Yahoo, AOL, etc., which will 
continue to pay according to the Library of Congress schedule. The bill will impose a 
six-month moratorium on fee assessment. The US Senate is expected to consider the bill 
in a week or so, but final action is unlikely before the Congressional election recess.

In related news, The Register also reports that the US law, often referred to as the 
"Mickey Mouse Act," which granted a 20-year extension to existing patents, is being 
challenged before the US Supreme Court by a Stanford University law professor.

=-=-=
Web links for articles available on Web site version. Please refer to Web site version 
for all revisions, corrections and updates.

Post comments to this article and view reader comments at the Web site. Web site 
version of this article can be viewed at: 
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=1074 




=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Copyright (c) 2002 Insanely Great Mac. All rights reserved. This article 
may not be republished in part or whole without explicit written 
permission from Insanely Great Mac.

Brought to you by Insanely Great Mac <http://www.insanely-great.com/>

To SUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject 
subscribe macnews

To UNSUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject 
unsubscribe macnews

Subscription problems/questions please email [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to