Why Apple is negotiating Lizenzvertr? Ge? F r its music service Cloud
Ger RIGHTS? For weeks are flying low, that Apple in negotiations with record companies and publishers to license the necessary rights to a cloud-based music service to secure places. But why did Apple need to negotiate something? Doesn? T Apple is already the right to sell music? Via the iTunes Music Store? To understand what? S is going on, m? We need to take a quick look how music licensing works take, and why Apple is trying to work with the music industry. Into Without too much history about the topic, What does a little bit unique musical copyright, as compared to other media that the law recognizes two coexistent Copyright: The underlying musical composition, and the record company performance. The law requires the consent, usually in the form of license fees? Hr, from both parties to sell a song to download, play on the radio they play in a bar or restaurant, and so on. Licensing is handled by publishers and record companies and blanket licenses f? R use are safe, handled by GEMA (PROs) like ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, SoundExchange and the Harry Fox Agency. W? While Un certain uses, how? Synchronization? use rights to an audio recording in a movie or on TV, right? Master using? rights to make a recording on a compilation requires a special agreement, “a CD that you eat with an implicit license f? r the K? shore, the f music? play the r pers? Personal use. It does not allow that any public benefits. However, w rde? the American music industry long ago that it is in their best interest to simplify f the licensing? r they? Public reqs? Channel Un recognized uses certain how to record a song someone wrote another on your plate, with a short test on a hip-hop record, a CD plays in a bar or restaurant or playing a song on the radio. The rates f? r September, this use of congressional elections statutes. Legally, these licenses allow radio stations Music Negotiation f without a special license? r each song with the publisher and the record label to play. In a twist of historical Circumstance, U.S. Copyright treated differently in radio airplay that f lead required the payment of license fees? r the ver? f publication lead songwriter, but not the performance license fees? r recording K? artists or their label thought. Man, that fair this arrangement, radio airplay gestures Since w?, should help to break the record market and turnover f? r the musicians. Internet-Radio-en, which emerged in the mid-90s, the status quo because they have a future in which all working music streams? over the Internet w? rde, and only M? want songwriters and K? paid nstlern w? get nothing rde k? JH. So a little over the last 15 years or so, industry’ve the music tries to figure out how to compensate for an order that all vehicles? writers, publishers, K? nstlern and record companies? Ver in the face of margins with engineering and class laws, treaties? GE designed abzurei in the days of AM radio? en. The current law requires digital non-interactive streaming services like satellite and Internet radio to the power lead license fees? pay and Dissemination of? Both pero channels like traditional AM? / FM radio still only pay the publisher. interactive online services (like Rhapsody, or RDIO Spotify If the user pulls the songs) are not allowed, legal to use licenses and have their own deal to with publishers and record companies. F? r Apple is the problem if your new cloud determination service? their role of music changed from a music-H? dealer, by a transmitter or interactive streaming service.? If they to pay license fees? hr each time song or played live? over the Internet? Legally you can pay the licensor? lead or m? they need to negotiate with the labels? Amazon ‘ ve decided not to have been an agreement with publishers and record companies. Google rumored removal by the labels in their negotiations, is now in one? similar position argue. yours, that they both simply cloud storage services f? r digital downloads f ? r the consumer has already paid a one-time permanent license. In its argument, there is no difference between using a digital media player a file stored in the cloud, and? access a file on a computer hard drive? About your home network. Apple is straight to work to publishers and recording companies a deal Them, which service, the music you want at the cost that makes sense to offer places. Ger? RIGHTS described it, Apple w? rde ? s service is not an interactive Subscription no music (like Rhapsody, RDIO), but on-demand access to music only you? is purchased. One of the sticking points of the report is to it? synchronize scan and “feature to upload Unn? TIG copies of songs from the user’s music library to avoid if Apple has it already in the file. It labels the Apple worries k? nnte scan f an illegal copy of the song? r consumers? S computer because that was never paid, and then? Sync? This song, to access a legal copy of Apple? S Service. This is THE solution Ger? cht Apple is willing to f some amount? pay r everybody? Synchronized? song, no matter whether it originally? ACCESSIBLE to the iTunes Store or not purchased. Despite the licensing costs to Apple, it’s Apple from paying f? r f is the use of bandwidth? save r to upload all the gigabytes of music, and it saves the cost of the? r storage and 10 million copies of Lady Gaga keep? S latest single . W? it during ? s difficult to predict what will happen, it seems likely that from Amazon and Google Apple? S Offer for attractive? r have the record companies. Complicated Even in the world of music licensing, licensor? lead and stick, Even if the labels are smaller than lead demand is infinitely better than none at all license fees related content from GigaOM Pro?. (subscription required D?): Report: Earn money with digital ContentThe Case f r Increaser & M A 2011: Actions and OutlooksThe structure 50: The Top 50 Innovators Cloud