‘(A) the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works; and
‘(B)(i) the total retail value of the performances, or the total economic value of such public performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, would exceed $2,500; or
‘(ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000;’; and"
It looks to me like this bill simply provides a punishment for profitable public performances of a copyrighted work. Lip-synching only qualifies here because presumably you're playing the song while you mime the lyrics. It's distribution of a copyrighted work. It has nothing to do with Lip-syncing. That's merely an example of one possible infringement. IMO, this is pretty poor journalism. Also, (again as near as I can tell) this applies to work where there is actual retail profit. B and C lay it out: "Total retail value", "Total economic value" or "Total Fair Market Value" greater than a few thousand dollars. This keeps people from riding their way up the fame wave on someone else's song without some sort of compensation.
All that said, I don't think we need to further enable IP abuse. I hope this one gets thrown out in committee.