From fork-admin@xent.com  Thu Sep 26 11:04:50 2002
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.spamassassin.taint.org
Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A72816F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 11:04:49 +0100 (IST)
Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 26 Sep 2002 11:04:49 +0100 (IST)
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8PMxPC17679 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:59:26 +0100
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 7AB48294164; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
Received: from jamesr.best.vwh.net (jamesr.best.vwh.net [192.220.76.165])
    by xent.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AB87D29409A for <fork@xent.com>;
    Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 7297 invoked by uid 19621); 25 Sep 2002 22:55:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO avalon) ([64.125.200.18]) (envelope-sender
    <jamesr@best.com>) by 192.220.76.165 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for
    <fork@xent.com>; 25 Sep 2002 22:55:59 -0000
Subject: Re: Digital radio playlists are prohibited?!
From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
In-Reply-To: <132203498905.20020925163453@magnesium.net>
References: <95745878-D05F-11D6-8F1E-000393A46DEA@alumni.caltech.edu>
    <132203498905.20020925163453@magnesium.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2-5mdk
Message-Id: <1032995753.27386.88.camel@avalon>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
    <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
Date: 25 Sep 2002 16:15:52 -0700

On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 13:34, bitbitch@magnesium.net wrote:
> 
> This, kiddies was apparently the legislative beginnings of the whole
> streaming audio-gets-spanked-by-fees ruling that came down in the
> earlier parts of this year.  This first act applied to non-exempt,
> non-subscription transmission services.  When Congress got around in
> 1998 and realized that webcasting services -might- be different
> (though I honestly can't see how) they wrote in the provision through
> the DMCA to include such transmissions.


The restrictive law regarding audio is actually the accumulated cruft of
30 years of various legislative acts. The totality of what we have now
come from various parts of all the following re: sound recordings:

1998 - DMCA
1995 - Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act
1992 - Audio Home Recording Act
1976 - Copyright Act amendment
1972 - Copyright Act amendment

It is worth noting that many people have forgotten about the 1976
Copyright Act Amendment which created the foundational law stating that
the copyright owners have the right to limit personal use of audio
recordings after First Sale even if you are not "making copies" in any
commercial sense.  Sound recordings, for many intents and purposes, are
explicitly excluded from Fair Use by the 1976 amendment.

-James Rogers
 jamesr@best.com



