Of Stream-Ripping And Horse-Trading
Digital royalty collector SoundExchange wants the Digital Media Association to work with the music industry to find ways to put a stop to "stream-ripping," which is essentially Web radio piracy. The group also wants webcasters to be more accurate in reporting how much music is being played.
In exchange, SoundExchange put a cap on the administrative fees Internet radio firms will have to pay through 2010. Both of these issues are examined in Technology Daily's PM Edition. But there is often more detail than one can cram into a 500-word article...
During a Monday afternoon sit-down with the Recording Industry Association of America's Mitch Glazier, the group's executive vice president for government and industry relations said the bottom line is that music labels are simply "trying to be proactive."
RIAA first raised the stream-ripping issue during a roundtable discussion years ago and has been engaging with webcasters ever since. Both the House and Senate versions of the Perform Act last year included an anti-ripping component as an updated condition on compulsory licenses.
Back in 1998, when the parties were negotiating those licenses, webcasters "thought they were able to properly protect the integrity of the signal and prevent the copying of Internet radio streams through sufficient security measures," Glazier said. New technology has changed all that and new measures are needed, he noted.
Some have questioned whether the problem of stream-ripping even exists. To that, Glazier responded: "Why wait until it is a big problem to start addressing it?" There are available technologies in the marketplace to address this issue, he said.
Although there has been hesitance on the part of webcasters -- "because of concerns over cost and consumer attitudes" -- he said music companies want to work with them "to come up with a cost-effective, hassle-free and technologically friendly solution."
SoundExchange spokesman Richard Ades said their request is not unreasonable: "What we're asking of DiMA is to the extent that it's feasible, implement anti-stream-ripping technologies. We understand that there are technologies out there."
While there is no way to know how much ripping takes place the millions of downloads of software that enables the practice is an indicator that the activity is not going away any time soon, he said. "It's in the interest of webcasters to prevent this as well," Ades said.
Pandora founder Tim Westergren said in an interview that "there isn’t any evidence that stream-ripping is widespread." He acknowledged, however, that software does exist that allows the activity. But it is not something that firms like his can control on users' computers, he added.
Hank Risan, founder of Media Rights Technologies, said that he has a solution but DiMA has not been ready to listen to him. Risan claims that his software, if adopted by major webcasters, could be implemented in less than 90 days.
Risan wants to be part of the ongoing dialogue between DiMA and music labels, but in the meantime, he has written to the Librarian of Congress to ask that some webcasters' licenses be revoked.
He said America Online, Live365, MSN Music, Real Networks, Yahoo, and others are distributing digital content as an interactive download service and ignoring their statutory obligations under the law.
All of those named in the complaint "incorporate or accommodate stream-ripping capability within their systems," Risan wrote. He even equated the service they are offering to that of Grokster prior to the landmark Supreme Court ruling.
It is important to note that DiMA Executive Director Jonathan Potter was not available for comment by deadline for the PM Edition, but my hunch is that he will probably be speaking out on this topic soon.
Join the Discussion
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus