[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected

To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, Chris Beckwith <beckwith@ime.net>
Subject: Re: NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected
From: Rick Hopper <hopperman@ispchannel.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:36:00 -0400
CC: Boston Radio Interest <bri@bostonradio.org>
In-Reply-To: <200104241502.LAA95694@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022

>> The inevitable decision forces terrestrial radio to pay the RIAA
>> royalties when it simulcasts music programming on the net.
> 
> ...which is utterly insane -- the record companies don't get royalties
> for any other use of recorded music -- and I'm certain will be
> appealed all the way.
> 
> -GAWollman
> 
> 

ASCAP BMI

Royalties stations pay are based on % of gross revenue?

Any internet advertising revenue is included in a station's gross?

or maybe not.

Help me Spock!

Rick @ WLNH 98.3 € BIG 101.5 € WEMJ
Laconia, NH

Follow-Ups:
- Re: NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected
  - From: Garrett Wollman <wollman>

References:
- NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected
  - From: Garrett Wollman <wollman>

Prev by Date: Ch. 7 drops lead anchor Kim Carrigan
Next by Date: Re: Ch. 7 drops lead anchor Kim Carrigan
Previous by thread: NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected
Next by thread: Re: NAB challenge to US Copyright Office ruling rejected
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread