Comment Re:There is no lawsuit. (Score 3, Informative) 332
From http://ewatch.prnewswire.com/rs/display.jsp?a=3070 2-309198409-850566157&key=D|136206|S|0|x|309198409 (linked to from http://www.mediarightstech.com/ ), the issue is BlueBeat.com an internet radio station (which is owned by the same people as MRT), and the increase in fees due to the Internet Radio Equality Act (which they think should not apply to them).
It all started when:
"In the summer of 2001, The MoMI was hit with a cease-and-desist letter
from the RIAA for copyright infringement, alleging damages of $150 million
to their members. Upon further investigation it was discovered that
Microsoft had circumvented The MoMI's copy protection, exposing hidden
music files in an "upgrade" to the Windows Media Player, turning secure
MoMI performances into downloads."
After which they invented a magic "anti-Stream Ripping provision" which others did not implement, and since:
"The basis for the rate hikes was primarily a result of the webcasting
community failing to adopt content control technology that would maintain
the integrity of the streamed performance."
It seems that what they are essentially trying to do it to get somebody else to compensate them for the rate hike that they will have to pay "If the Internet Radio Equality Act is to pass", or pressure others to influence the content of the act.
This is really a non-story, and since their issue seems to be with internet radio and stream rippers the inclusion of Apple may be due to their misunderstanding of the technology involved.
And their actual goal:
"The message is clear and simple: if webcasting royalty rates are to be
equalized with Satellite or Digital FM broadcasts by passage of The
Internet Radio Equality Act, Stream Ripping protection provisions must be
added to the Bill before the CRB rates go into effect May 15, 2007."
Making their position no less bizzare, they don't want anyone to buy their technology, just illogical in a different way.
It all started when:
"In the summer of 2001, The MoMI was hit with a cease-and-desist letter
from the RIAA for copyright infringement, alleging damages of $150 million
to their members. Upon further investigation it was discovered that
Microsoft had circumvented The MoMI's copy protection, exposing hidden
music files in an "upgrade" to the Windows Media Player, turning secure
MoMI performances into downloads."
After which they invented a magic "anti-Stream Ripping provision" which others did not implement, and since:
"The basis for the rate hikes was primarily a result of the webcasting
community failing to adopt content control technology that would maintain
the integrity of the streamed performance."
It seems that what they are essentially trying to do it to get somebody else to compensate them for the rate hike that they will have to pay "If the Internet Radio Equality Act is to pass", or pressure others to influence the content of the act.
This is really a non-story, and since their issue seems to be with internet radio and stream rippers the inclusion of Apple may be due to their misunderstanding of the technology involved.
And their actual goal:
"The message is clear and simple: if webcasting royalty rates are to be
equalized with Satellite or Digital FM broadcasts by passage of The
Internet Radio Equality Act, Stream Ripping protection provisions must be
added to the Bill before the CRB rates go into effect May 15, 2007."
Making their position no less bizzare, they don't want anyone to buy their technology, just illogical in a different way.
