Hylly
Henkilönnimi
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Did Vimeo Kill the Radio Star? : DMCA Safe Harbors, Pre-1972 Sound Recordings & the Future of Digital Music
Julkaistu
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, ISSN 0736-7694 ; 34(2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. This Note will analyze the history of DMCA Safe Harbor protection for pre-1972 sound recordings and the judiciarys shift from favoring OSPs to content owners, in addition to the potentially unfavorable effects on the future of digital music. Part I provides an overview of relevant legal foundations, including the Sound Recording Amendment of 1971 and the DMCA Safe Harbors. Part II provides an analysis of the MP3Tunes case and its role in bringing pre-1972 sound recordings under the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions. Part III provides an analysis of the more recent Grooveshark and Vimeo cases and their role in reversing the decision in MP3Tunes. Part IV discusses the evolving economic landscape of the music industry and the growth of digital music streaming. Part V contemplates the potentially negative impact of the Grooveshark and Vimeo decisions on the future of digital music and proposes that Congress enact legislation federalizing pre- 1972 sound recordings in order to alleviate such concerns. INTRODUCTION 444 I. BACKGROUND LAW ... 448 A. The Sound Recording Amendment of 1971. 448 B. The Applicability of Federal Copyright Law to Pre-1972 Sound Recordings... 449 C. Section 512: An Overview of the DMCA Safe Harbors.... 451 1. Key Provisions ............ 451 2. Public Policy, Legislative History, and Legislative Intent.... 453 II. MP3TUNES: PRE-1972 SOUND RECORDINGS ENTER FEDERAL SAFE HARBORS... 455 III. VICTORIES FOR CONTENT OWNERS? GROOVESHARK AND VIMEO SET A NEW TREND.... 457 A. The Grooveshark Case ...... 457 B. The Vimeo Case ......... 460 IV. THE SHIFTING LANDSCAPE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.. 461 A. The Effect of Digital Streaming on the Market .... 461 B. Artists Revenue Streams........... 462 V. THE PITFALLS OF LITIGATION AND THE NEED FOR FEDERALIZATION....... 462 A. The Inadequacy of Litigation ... 462 B. The Downstream Effects of Litigation on Content Creators..... 464 1. Content Creators Rely on OSPs to Serve Their Primary Revenue Stream ...... 464 2. Limits on Preservation and Access for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings........... 466 CONCLUSION........ 467
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 0736-7694 ; 34(2)
Elektronisen aineiston sijainti ja käyttö (URI) http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Adachi-Did-Vimeo-Kill-the-Radio-Star.pdf Linkki verkkoaineistoon
*00003148nab a22003134a 4500
*00111159
*00520201106111828.0
*007tu
*008170117s2016\\\\xx\|||||\||||\|||||0eng|c
*035 $a23847
*035 $a(PLib-conv)0000023847
*0410 $aeng
*090 $aOMA:SA-CA30
*1001 $aAdachi, Tatsuya.
*24510$aDid Vimeo Kill the Radio Star? :$bDMCA Safe Harbors, Pre-1972 Sound Recordings & the Future of Digital Music /$cTatsuya Adachi.
*260 $c2016.
*300 $a443-468.
*4901 $aCardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal,$x0736-7694 ;$v34(2)
*520 $aThis Note will analyze the history of DMCA Safe Harbor protection for pre-1972 sound recordings and the judiciarys shift from favoring OSPs to content owners, in addition to the potentially unfavorable effects on the future of digital music. Part I provides an overview of relevant legal foundations, including the Sound Recording Amendment of 1971 and the DMCA Safe Harbors. Part II provides an analysis of the MP3Tunes case and its role in bringing pre-1972 sound recordings under the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions. Part III provides an analysis of the more recent Grooveshark and Vimeo cases and their role in reversing the decision in MP3Tunes. Part IV discusses the evolving economic landscape of the music industry and the growth of digital music streaming. Part V contemplates the potentially negative impact of the Grooveshark and Vimeo decisions on the future of digital music and proposes that Congress enact legislation federalizing pre- 1972 sound recordings in order to alleviate such concerns. INTRODUCTION 444 I. BACKGROUND LAW ... 448 A. The Sound Recording Amendment of 1971. 448 B. The Applicability of Federal Copyright Law to Pre-1972 Sound Recordings... 449 C. Section 512: An Overview of the DMCA Safe Harbors.... 451 1. Key Provisions ............ 451 2. Public Policy, Legislative History, and Legislative Intent.... 453 II. MP3TUNES: PRE-1972 SOUND RECORDINGS ENTER FEDERAL SAFE HARBORS... 455 III. VICTORIES FOR CONTENT OWNERS? GROOVESHARK AND VIMEO SET A NEW TREND.... 457 A. The Grooveshark Case ...... 457 B. The Vimeo Case ......... 460 IV. THE SHIFTING LANDSCAPE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.. 461 A. The Effect of Digital Streaming on the Market .... 461 B. Artists Revenue Streams........... 462 V. THE PITFALLS OF LITIGATION AND THE NEED FOR FEDERALIZATION....... 462 A. The Inadequacy of Litigation ... 462 B. The Downstream Effects of Litigation on Content Creators..... 464 1. Content Creators Rely on OSPs to Serve Their Primary Revenue Stream ...... 464 2. Limits on Preservation and Access for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings........... 466 CONCLUSION........ 467
*653 $aÄÄNENTALLENNUS
*653 $aÄÄNITTÄMINEN
*653 $aÄÄNITTEET
*653 $aTEKIJÄNOIKEUS
*653 $aMUSIIKKITEOLLISUUS
*830 0$aCardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal,$x0736-7694 ;$v34(2)
*852 $hSA-CA30$cADACHI
*85641$uhttp://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Adachi-Did-Vimeo-Kill-the-Radio-Star.pdf$yLinkki verkkoaineistoon
*979 $a0000023847
*999 $aMikroMarc$b[Article]$x7
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.