|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...licensed-songs
As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On 3/21/2019 10:21 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Everyone here who has written and sold software understood it. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On 22/03/2019 9:39 a.m., AMuzi wrote:
On 3/21/2019 10:21 PM, Tim McNamara wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton.Â* How is that not immediately understandable to you?Â* There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Everyone here who has written and sold software understood it. +1 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:21:46 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Tim, if they simply turned a radio station on that plays that sort of music no one could have a beef. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On Friday, March 22, 2019 at 5:28:43 PM UTC-4, Radey Shouman wrote:
writes: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:21:46 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Tim, if they simply turned a radio station on that plays that sort of music no one could have a beef. Radio stations pay license fees to ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC, some trickle of which goes to the original artists (who are generally not the copyright holders). But there are plenty of beefs to go around, for example playing the radio for customer entertainment in a restaurant or other business without additional licensing is a problem. I do hesitate at the word "stealing". Copyright infringement may be unlawful, wrong, dishonest &c, but it's not literaly stealing. If someone steals your bicycle, you no longer have that bicycle. If someone uses your copyrighted material without license, you may have lost some potential income from it, but it's not obvious how much. Copyright/Trademark extends to the hobby of plastic model building too. Many companies now market kits called "Commando Car" or "Utility Vehicle" because otherwise they have to pay for the use of the name jeep if it starts with an upper case J. A lot of people have trouble when they cross the line from Fair Use to Copyright/Trademark infringement. Cheers |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
On Friday, March 22, 2019 at 3:55:01 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:21:46 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Tim, if they simply turned a radio station on that plays that sort of music no one could have a beef. Perhaps, but if they record the music the radio station plays then they could possibly have problems. Cheers |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
almost Cycling News
Sir Ridesalot writes:
On Friday, March 22, 2019 at 5:28:43 PM UTC-4, Radey Shouman wrote: writes: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 8:21:46 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:34:58 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 15:39:51 -0500, AMuzi wrote: https://www.si.com/edge/2019/03/19/p...t-150-million- copyright-infringement-unlicensed-songs As it turns out, stealing is wrong. This is news to some people apparently It wasn't "stealing" as nothing was taken from anyone. The failures were in "licensing the performance" and in the taste of Peleton. Which means the revenue due to the artists, composers, etc., was stolen from them by Peloton. How is that not immediately understandable to you? There are laws governing copyright, royalties, mechanical licenses, etc. Tim, if they simply turned a radio station on that plays that sort of music no one could have a beef. Radio stations pay license fees to ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC, some trickle of which goes to the original artists (who are generally not the copyright holders). But there are plenty of beefs to go around, for example playing the radio for customer entertainment in a restaurant or other business without additional licensing is a problem. I do hesitate at the word "stealing". Copyright infringement may be unlawful, wrong, dishonest &c, but it's not literaly stealing. If someone steals your bicycle, you no longer have that bicycle. If someone uses your copyrighted material without license, you may have lost some potential income from it, but it's not obvious how much. Copyright/Trademark extends to the hobby of plastic model building too. Many companies now market kits called "Commando Car" or "Utility Vehicle" because otherwise they have to pay for the use of the name jeep if it starts with an upper case J. You have to pay royalties for "Jalopy"? A lot of people have trouble when they cross the line from Fair Use to Copyright/Trademark infringement. Cheers -- |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
cycling news | AMuzi | Techniques | 5 | May 7th 13 01:40 PM |
What's up with Cycling News? | ilan[_2_] | Racing | 1 | February 10th 11 01:58 PM |
Cycling News | Sandy | Racing | 8 | May 25th 07 06:05 PM |
More cycling news | Tim Hall | UK | 18 | December 7th 06 12:28 PM |
Cycling News RSS | Ewoud Dronkert | Racing | 7 | September 28th 06 09:59 PM |