When a young company is in need of some dough, they often will issue an IPO. But what if, instead of a company, an author decides to sell shares of his book royalties? Tao Lin is doing exactly that. [more inside]
posted by thatbrunette on Aug 2, 2008 - 45 comments

"I mean he quite literally -- and in no way do I exaggerate when I say -- [Paul Simon] stole the songs from us." [more inside]
posted by Sys Rq on Apr 19, 2008 - 75 comments

Ethically in my opinion, Bono’s tax arrangements are entirely inconsistent with his calls upon government to support anti-poverty drives,” said Richard Murphy, one of three co-authors of the SOMO report (.pdf) on Dutch tax shelters. “You cannot be demanding that resources be allocated to anti-poverty drives and then deny those resources to government.”
posted by four panels on Feb 4, 2007 - 86 comments

Sound Exchange Can't Find Wall of Voodoo Who else can't they find? Charles Mingus, Archers of Loaf, Art Blakey, T. Rex, Brand Nubian, Art Blakey, and thousands of others. The link is comprhensive list of the "missing," which is a long list indeed, but includes many who aren't that hard to find. Nashville entertainment lawyer Fred Wilhelms has tried to help SoundExchange as he has written about at least twice in Counterpunch. SoundExchange is the organization put together by the R1AA and the major entertainnment companies to collect royalties for streaming (Internet, DMX, XM) radio performances protected by copyright and to distribute it to the artists. These, indeed, are some of the royalties that could be going to artists, if only SoundExchange could find them. Unfortunately, many artists will not be getting pizzaid for performances from 1996-2000 if they do not register with SoundExchange by December 15 of this year (2006). SoundExchange was chartered to find these artists or their estates, but apparently they aren't looking very hard. Why? Because if the artists don't register, SoundExchange (read: R1AA and their corporate partners) GET TO KEEP IT!.
posted by beelzbubba on Oct 21, 2006 - 21 comments

USA Today and others are reporting that Doubleday will be publishing "[t]he original thoughts of Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders" in a book to be sold in the U.S. (and presumably abroad). From the CNN article, Doubleday plans on donating proceeds from the sale to charity, and openly describes plans to flaunt U.S. law by NOT paying royalties for the use of source materials.

What are the ramifications for a publishing company (which relies on royalty payments and preservation of copyright for self-survival) to ignore their own rules (and U.S. law) when it suits them? Should we expect anyone in the U.S. to care about the royalty payments to these two individuals? Furthermore, could Doubleday's stance affect any of the other copyright infringement actions currently being taken by U.S. organizations?
posted by aberrant on Jan 22, 2005 - 32 comments

Royalties Reunited allows artists to collect the royalties from British radio stations, pub jukeboxes, restaurants, gyms and linedancing clubs that "their people" have forgotten to claim. DJ Shadow is there - that's a little money. Nobukazu Takemura is there - that's less money. But the one that surprises me appears after a search for "stupid" - a rather famous actress has failed to collect for her Christmas #1 megahit. I believe we're talking about a lot of money. Are you going to tell her or should I?
posted by Pretty_Generic on Feb 3, 2003 - 4 comments

The story of 'Wimoweh' 'Mbube' or more popularly 'The Lion Sleeps Tonight'. In which a Zulu migrante creates one of the most recorded songs of the twentieth century, but because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, failed to get any royalties and died a pauper. A contribution to the music copyright debate.
posted by feelinglistless on Jan 10, 2003 - 14 comments

Artemis Records waives Internet royalty fees. "Artemis Records [the label for Steve Earle, among others] has agreed to issue licenses to internet radio for one year for the master use of songs by all Artemis recording artists. This announcement was made today by Danny Goldberg, Chairman and CEO, Artemis Records and Daniel Glass, President, Artemis Records. During this period, beginning August 1, 2002, Artemis will waive the royalty payments that would otherwise be due them. "
posted by mikewas on Jul 29, 2002 - 17 comments

CARP claims a victim. KPIG, the first radio station to broadcast on the net says "oink!" and falls silent. One shoe fell on June 20, when the new digital performance royalty rate was established. The other shoe is soon to fall. Internet radio stations now have a whopping bill for retroactive royalties that comes due later this fall. More links: Save Internet Ratio! ... Radio and Internet Newsletter ... more news via Google.
posted by chipr on Jul 22, 2002 - 40 comments

Royalties proposed for booming used market as new-CD sales stagnate. (Via Slashdot). First sale doctrine, anyone? Section 109 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 109, permits the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under title 17 to sell or otherwise dispose of possession of that copy or phonorecord without the authority of the copyright owner, notwithstanding the copyright owner's exclusive right of distribution under 17 U.S.C. 106(3). Commonly referred to as the ``first sale doctrine,'' this provision permits such activities as the sale of used books. The first sale doctrine is subject to limitations that permit a copyright owner to prevent the unauthorized commercial rental of computer programs and sound recordings.
posted by Bezuhin on Jun 14, 2002 - 23 comments

Mayday! Small independent webcasters -- the ones who couldn't come up with the cash to participate in the CARP -- join forces to protest the CARP-imposed sound recording royalties and accompanying intrusive recordkeeping requirements. They urge that you write to your Congresscritter. Will all this grassroots effort really sway the Library of Congress?
posted by IPLawyer on May 1, 2002 - 13 comments

May 1st Day of Silence Hundreds of Internet radio stations and channels across America are shutting off their music streams on Wednesday, May 1st, in a "Day of Silence" to highlight their concern over the upcoming U.S. Copyright Office ruling on royalty rates that may shut down or bankrupt the vast majority of the nascent Internet radio industry. Write your senators and congressmen and women--Here's how--the Copyright office (info here) and the press. Please note: Letters to the editor (which must be entirely original and not contain any pasted material) can also be sent to your local daily & weekly papers. In both cases we recommend that you send a copy of your message to all of your congressional representatives. See congress.org for email addresses. A copy via fax is also recommended, since faxes often carry more weight than email. Snail mail to Congress these days is very slow, due to the anthrax screening. Please write, this is important. And thank you, Su, for reminding me.
posted by y2karl on Apr 29, 2002 - 2 comments

Despite royalty costs that are lower than for commercial stations, numerous college and community radio stations have either shut down their Internet streams or on the verge of doing so. It's not just royalties killing these webcasts -- there are also regulations that require college stations to report every song they play and restrictions that would force college stations to police how often they play any given artist. Stations are trying to unite and fight these restrictions, but is it too little, too late? Nearly twenty webcasts have already gone under...
posted by insomnia_lj on Apr 8, 2002 - 10 comments

How many CDs do you have to sell to afford that BMW?Find out how much money musicians don't make with the Royalty Caculator.
posted by BarneyFifesBullet on Mar 5, 2002 - 4 comments

It's official, streaming music is now 14 cents per song and retroactive to 1998. An update to an earlier thread, this new ruling would add $150,000 in monthly royalty fees to live365, and probably kill whatever streaming radio sites are currently out there. Of course broadcasting via AM/FM is half price, so maybe pirate radio stations will grow more popular.
posted by mathowie on Feb 22, 2002 - 59 comments

U.S. representative questions the legality of copy-protecting CDs. A decade ago, record companies pushed through a law (the Audio Home Recording Act - summary or full text) that gave them a royalty on the sale of certain blank recording media; in return, they acknowledged the right for listeners to make some digital copies for personal use. Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) is asking if new schemes blocking even legitimate copies are in violation of this law.
posted by pmurray63 on Jan 5, 2002 - 6 comments

ASCAP & BMI -- Protectors of Artists or Shadowy Thieves? Read interested in the internal machinations of the music industry may be interested to read this essay describing how ASCAP works, who it targets, and who it benefit.
posted by faisal on May 2, 2001 - 2 comments

Contentville is selling copies of over 1.5 million college dissertations and theses published since 1871. Contentville claims that authors will be paid royalties if their works are sold, but somehow I don't think they contacted most of those authors for permission to put said works up for sale in the first place.
posted by phichens on Aug 14, 2000 - 15 comments