And this makes the $49,000 judgement for 14 songs played at a bar on a Karaoke night more reasonable?
Owning a copyright to a song should not mean getting paid for every single use in every single instance. It should never be a right - implied or otherwise, to get something for doing nothing just because you own the copyright.
Good lord you are clueless!! (Unless you are being sarcastically funny... then Haha you got me!)
Regardless, I think this just demonstrates the point again that the RIAA is going to become irrelevant and die unless they figure out how to change and embrace technology and come up with a new business model. It's a pretty easy message to read: We don't need the middleman anymore.
Is the newspaper industry feeling so backed into the corner these days that they just have resorted to fight or flight?
I honestly do not see why they have such a big problem with Google. Is it that they just have such a huge misunderstanding of what Google is doing that they think Google is a threat that needs to be eliminated?
It's really hard to follow their rationale on this. It's actually pretty simple: Either enjoy the free advertising that Google gives you and shut up or block them and figure out how to monetize your content on your own.
But still not good enough. It's an insult to the customer in a way because they are basically telling us that fair use is okay if they get to dictate the terms completely and have all of the control over how you use the content.
Rather than wasting time trying to work out something reasonable with these assclowns just go nuclear and completely remove any reference to them from your search results and be done with it. Let them go at it alone and they can live or die by the sword.
It shocks me that they appear to either not see or completely ignore the benefits.