Are there provisions for that in copyright law or fair use? If not, then Amazon will have to pay up in someway. Considering how often youtube videos get "claimed" for having only seconds of copyrighted music in them, I think such provisions do not exist (hopefully someday they will). It doesn't matter how we view this situation, it is how it is, and if the record companies want to enforce their rights over the broadcast of their music, they absolutely can (whether it sucks or not).
I don't think this argument holds weight considering even event venues such as bars and restaurants are required to license the music they play in the US.
Youtube claims aren't a good guide, because a ton of shit that gets strikes shouldn't. It's all just algorithms.
This is hilariously false. They aren't paying for the music that's on the radio they have on, and the cover band they have isn't paying the music label for the songs.
You're on a real roll today pal
Do you even read the shit you post?You're on a real roll today pal
Music Licensing for Bars and Restaurants: What You Need to Know
If you play recorded or live music in your bar, you need to be fully aware of all music licensing requirements. The price of not knowing and complying when required opens your business to legal clams by music rights holders such as ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC that could be very costly if your are suedwww.barbusinessowner.com
No bar or restaurant outside of a total dive is playing music from the radio, the place would be empty. 99% of locations are paying to license music. Half of bars these days have Touchtunes which licenses music. Cut your bullshit.
What exactly is the point of this rambling trainwreck of a post? You're carrying on about how the little guy gets fucked by the justice system at the same time that you're complaining that Amazon, the 3rd largest company in the world, has to pay people to use their copyrighted music? Yeah that tracks. I don't even know what you're on about with this Marvin Gaye stuff.
Did you actually expect me to dig through this thread like Matlock to piece together your incoherent ramblings?
Any evidence that the record industry hasn't been trying to negotiate with Twitch or is this just an ass pull?
Why can't they do both? That is pretty much precisely how Youtube tried to strongarm the GEMA here a few years back. Unhappy how the negotiation went, youtube instead just started geoblocking thousands of music videos even though there were no takedown notices for those videos just to put public pressure on GEMA to get them to cave.
Yeah I don't think YouTube should be able to geoblock people's content because it *might* include music they couldn't license, that's ridiculous. But that's not what's happening here. The content that is getting pulled/disallowed from Twitch is content that does in fact contain copyrighted material. I understand that it's a negotiation tactic that's going to piss off a lot of end users - that's the point of it. You see it all the time in TV cable contract negotiations where a media company pulls it's channels from a package because they're not getting the rate they want in a new contract. Almost without fail though the subscribers start bitching and canceling and not long after they have a new contract. Is that what will happen here? I guess we'll see. But all this moaning about the record industry "asking for too much" is pretty nonsensical considering we, the public, have no idea what they are actually asking for other than they want more than they're getting now which is *nothing*.
