RSS
Why Should XM Have To Get Permission From The Recording Industry To Innovate?
from the still-asking dept
In a rather disappointing move, satellite radio company XM has now settled with EMI concerning a lawsuit over its Inno device, that allowed users to record XM streams. This follows XM's similar settlements with the other major record labels last year. No terms are being announced, which is problematic. The whole problem with this lawsuit was the fact that the record labels seemed to believe that XM was unable to innovate without getting their permission and paying them. The Inno device was simply a device to record satellite radio streams -- which is perfectly legal. Time shifting and recording radio is well-established as being legal. But the recording industry used the case to try to squeeze extra royalty payments out of XM.
This is exactly the sort of "chilling effect" that people keep pointing out when it comes to copyright laws. These laws put the entertainment companies in a position where they get to dictate what kind of devices are legal and which are not. Increasing the uncertainty over whether or not a simple device like the Inno is legal, and forcing a two year legal battle to take place is no way to promote progress and innovation. It just makes many companies unwilling to go through that process just to offer the type of device that makes perfect sense and which customers want. It's doubly troublesome in that the RIAA specifically said that it would not step in to prevent these types of devices. Except that it did.
With that said, I was hoping that XM would stand up to the lawsuits and set a precedent, making it clear that the record labels cannot sue to block new technologies. However, with all of these settlements, that's not the case -- so the uncertainty and the chilling effects remain for all others. No settlement terms have been released, so it may even be that XM agreed to pay off the record labels to get them to settle, which would be even worse. It would just give the labels that much more incentive to keep suing every innovative new product that hits the market. This is extortion that slows down innovation and progress -- which is what we thought copyright was supposed to be promoting.
This is exactly the sort of "chilling effect" that people keep pointing out when it comes to copyright laws. These laws put the entertainment companies in a position where they get to dictate what kind of devices are legal and which are not. Increasing the uncertainty over whether or not a simple device like the Inno is legal, and forcing a two year legal battle to take place is no way to promote progress and innovation. It just makes many companies unwilling to go through that process just to offer the type of device that makes perfect sense and which customers want. It's doubly troublesome in that the RIAA specifically said that it would not step in to prevent these types of devices. Except that it did.
With that said, I was hoping that XM would stand up to the lawsuits and set a precedent, making it clear that the record labels cannot sue to block new technologies. However, with all of these settlements, that's not the case -- so the uncertainty and the chilling effects remain for all others. No settlement terms have been released, so it may even be that XM agreed to pay off the record labels to get them to settle, which would be even worse. It would just give the labels that much more incentive to keep suing every innovative new product that hits the market. This is extortion that slows down innovation and progress -- which is what we thought copyright was supposed to be promoting.
I’m looking for research...
Apps, Platforms, Consumer Use
Why Data Is The New Oil, With Dan Foreman Of Lumi Mobile
I have a business...
Why 50,000 Monthly Active Users Weren't Enough To Stop This Company From Pivoting, With Spun Co-Founder Scott Lindenbaum
The Talent Wars: Today's Toughest Startup Challenge
I have an idea...
5 Things You Should Know About Crowdfunding For Startups
App Developer Conversations: Successful Fundraising Techniques
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
XM has cleared it's way to do what it wants without either clearing the air for a competitor OR affecting the RIAA's basic argument in any way.
Sounds like it was done in a lawyer's office all right...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
re
What really needs to happen is non-RIAA companies telling the RIAA to piss off and mind their own business. Period.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Kids, how do we spell
I-R-O-N-Y?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
no settlement
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I'm confused: extortion and slowing innovation is what copyright is promoting...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Laying low
EG
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No, RobG
RIAA is trying to use this back door by way of the change in broadcast technology to bypass the law and extort people - ultimately it's the end user getting cheated.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment