Re: Clear Channel ends streaming broadcasts ... please explain

[hmglaz@webtv.net (Howard Glazer)]

Sid Schweiger wrote: 

>2) The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
> forces webcasters (and broadcast-web
> simulcasters) to, in some cases, alter
> their programming so as not to violate
> the law, to wit: No playing of an artist
> twice in a row.

I believe the rule is _no more than_ twice in a row. However, WUMB
Boston  recently dedicated a week to the top 100 folk artists as voted
by its listeners. Each artist had three or four songs played,
consecutively, and every minute of this programming went out over the
Web, via Live365.com. 

On the other hand, WFUV New York, which also continues to stream,
through its own server, has an apology posted on its site explaining
that it cannot stream "Long Player," a show devoted to full album sides,
over the Web due to the DMCA. It substitutes prerecorded filler
programming on its stream, picking up the live feed when the station
returns to its normal format.

So, are the rules different for public broadcasters? Should WUMB fear
nasty lawyer mail from the RIAA or is WFUV pulling programming
unnecessarily? Does the fact that WUMB streams via Live365 make any
difference?

Also, couldn't taking your streams offshore be a way to work around the
onerous DMCA? That's what online casinos and sports betting operations
have done. And webcasters abroad continue to stream copyrighted American
music unhindered. Or would Entercom have to actually incorporate in
Antigua, or wherever, to escape the Act?

Howard