Sued for playing Christmas music?

[blackout]

What a pathetic and greedy world we live in. I have not sympathies for the music makers or people's who job it is to catch people in these violations. It's all about GREED!

It's greedy for musicians and broadcasters to want/expect to be paid?

Do you really mean that?

 

[Sunstone]

It's greedy for musicians and broadcasters to want/expect to be paid?

Do you really mean that?

The hussies!

 

[blackout]

The hussies!

*adjusts her shirt to show more cleavage*

 

[waitasec]

It's greedy for musicians and broadcasters to want/expect to be paid?

Do you really mean that?

naw, musicians shouldn't get paid for their talents...why should they?

it's just music....

:sarcastic

 

[pwfaith]

No, I don't have a problem with them wanting to get paid, but I think it crosses the line into greed by sending people out intentionally to catch a company simply playing the radio or being able to sue someone for playing music too loud in their car - not b/c it's a noise disturbance but b/c they are playing it so people outside their own earshot can hear. That is what I find absurd and greedy. I don't have a problem with them charging for their CD's, downloads, or radio stations to even play the song to begin with, I have a problem with it being wrong to play it in your bank, office, etc. I'm not talking about an amphitheater full of people, but really, come on, it goes beyond ridiculous to not be able to play it in a building that likely won't have more than a couple hundred people at any given time, if that many, esp if it's being played on the radio which will be reaching thousands individually.

 

[waitasec]

No, I don't have a problem with them wanting to get paid, but I think it crosses the line into greed by sending people out intentionally to catch a company simply playing the radio or being able to sue someone for playing music too loud in their car - not b/c it's a noise disturbance but b/c they are playing it so people outside their own earshot can hear.

can you provide proof of this please?

 

[pwfaith]

It was brought up earlier in the thread, I believe.

I would presume if it's illegal to play it for your office it should also be illegal to play it from your car, particularly if for a group of people outside your car, right? What would be the difference, both are reaching ears other than your own, correct? (I was exaggerating, btw b/c I still think it's stupid a company has to buy additional copyright permissions just to play the radio in their office when it's perfectly fine to play it in your car for the same group of people sitting around a parking lot).

 

[Skwim]

It was brought up earlier in the thread, I believe.

I would presume if it's illegal to play it for your office it should also be illegal to play it from your car, particularly if for a group of people outside your car, right? What would be the difference, both are reaching ears other than your own, correct? (I was exaggerating, btw b/c I still think it's stupid a company has to buy additional copyright permissions just to play the radio in their office when it's perfectly fine to play it in your car for the same group of people sitting around a parking lot).

A company plays music because they feel it will benefit the company. Even if it's only to keep up morale it benefits from that employee morale. So, where an organization derives a benefit from the use of a product it is expected to pay for that product. And, even where an employee brings in a radio and plays it loud enough for others to enjoy, it's presumed the company permits it for the same reason it would bring in music itself. It benefits the company. Playing one's radio in a car loud enough for many others to hear does not rise to any thing more than a personal benefit.

 

[Kathryn]

A company plays music because they feel it will benefit the company. Even if it's only to keep up morale it benefits from that employee morale. So, where an organization derives a benefit from the use of a product it is expected to pay for that product. Playing one's radio in a car loud enough for many others to hear does not rise to any thing more than a personal benefit. And, even where an employee brings in a radio and plays it loud enough for others to enjoy, it's presumed the company permits it for the same reason it would bring in music itself. It benefits the company.

The employees paid for the radio, the CDs, etc already. The benefit to the customers is really secondary. The employees wanted to hear the Christmas music that they already paid for, themselves. But it's pretty hard NOT the let the customers hear it as well.

Honestly, it seems so petty.

 

[Skwim]

The employees paid for the radio, the CDs, etc already. The benefit to the customers is really secondary. The employees wanted to hear the Christmas music that they already paid for, themselves. But it's pretty hard NOT the let the customers hear it as well.

Honestly, it seems so petty.

If petty justifies breaking the law where on the slippery slope does the justification stop? As a matter of practicality it probably wouldn't be good business to go after the little guys, the petty scofflaws, but they're no less guilty than the big guys. They'll only escape because they're small fry, not because they're right. Like a lot in life, we pick the fights worth fighting.

 

[jasonwill2]

Semi threadhop:

I see nothing wrong with it.

It's intellectual property rights and capitalism in action.
If you want the music, you have to pay for it.

Maybe they will start sueing for listioning to radio to loud and sharing it with neighbors

I had no idea playing a radio could cause a company to be sued, hmm. It got me thinking ... how far does this go? Could an individual be sued for playing their car radio sitting in traffic/parked with the window down where other members of the public can hear? (perhaps I am overthinking this). Record companies make enough from sales, normally after hearing a song on the radio so I don't see why they need to make such a fuss.

They are playing the radio, which has a license. How the hell is playing a radio in public illegal?

If they mean their OWN radio with their own playlist, then I can see why they would sue them. However, if it is from a local radio that happens to be playing Christmas songs, then NO NO NO. That's just wrong. The radio has a liscence, and nobody is hearing anything that they wouldn't hear for free anyway by turning on the radios in their cars.

Why must these people ruin an already non-denominational Christmas??!?!?

 

[Kathryn]

When it's against the law for bank tellers to listen to a CD they bought on a CD player they bought, and their company can get sued for it - things have gone a bit too far.

 

[waitasec]

When it's against the law for bank tellers to listen to a CD they bought on a CD player they bought, and their company can get sued for it - things have gone a bit too far.

because their company is run by bean counters...

 

[blackout]

When it's against the law for bank tellers to listen to a CD they bought on a CD player they bought, and their company can get sued for it - things have gone a bit too far.

When it's within the law
for banks to create 'money' out of thin air
with nothing at all to back it
and then have the nerve to charge YOU and Me (ie, everyone else) interest for it,
things have gone WAY too far.

And yet here we are.

 

[waitasec]

When it's within the law
for banks to create 'money' out of thin air
with nothing at all to back it
and then have the nerve to charge YOU and Me (ie, everyone else) interest for it,
things have gone WAY too far.

And yet here we are.

:clap
:bow:

 

[jasonwill2]

This reminds me of when the Girl Scouts almost got sued for singing "happy birthday", but the company owning the song backed out due to public shame.

Really though, if they are playing a local radio station that JUST HAPPENS to be playing Christmas tunes, what is wrong with that?

It's pretty stupid. When I think of it the local walmart plays a local radio station, 95.1 FM I think. Should Walmart be sued for playing the latest pop artist in their store too?

 

[waitasec]

This reminds me of when the Girl Scouts almost got sued for singing "happy birthday", but the company owning the song backed out due to public shame.

Really though, if they are playing a local radio station that JUST HAPPENS to be playing Christmas tunes, what is wrong with that?

It's pretty stupid. When I think of it the local walmart plays a local radio station, 95.1 FM I think. Should Walmart be sued for playing the latest pop artist in their store too?

i don't think it was a radio station playing, it was a CD, there is a difference.
and it goes back to the bank owners, why didn't they pay for the licensing in the first place... it is their place of business after all, not the employees.

 

[jasonwill2]

i don't think it was a radio station playing, it was a CD, there is a difference.
and it goes back to the bank owners, why didn't they pay for the licensing in the first place... it is their place of business after all, not the employees.

If it was a CD that is a different case. It still though doesn't change the fact that the music companies are being asinine about it. What are they losing? Say someone goes "I like this song, I'll scan it with my phone to see what it is and download it off iTunes!"

Then the music company would actually make money because it was played in public. If someone hears it in public then they might like it and buy it for themselves.

And even if not, it's for the freakin' holiday's! Of all the times to be charitable and nice these jerks decide to sue people who aren't hurting, and might even be helping, their record sales!

Can I get sued for playing one of my CD's at a huge party of 100 people now too? Where is the line drawn here?

 

[Tarheeler]

Semi threadhop:







They are playing the radio, which has a license. How the hell is playing a radio in public illegal?

If they mean their OWN radio with their own playlist, then I can see why they would sue them. However, if it is from a local radio that happens to be playing Christmas songs, then NO NO NO. That's just wrong. The radio has a liscence, and nobody is hearing anything that they wouldn't hear for free anyway by turning on the radios in their cars.

Why must these people ruin an already non-denominational Christmas??!?!?

Because we're talking about a business that is open to the public and not private citizens.

 

[waitasec]

If it was a CD that is a different case. It still though doesn't change the fact that the music companies are being asinine about it. What are they losing? Say someone goes "I like this song, I'll scan it with my phone to see what it is and download it off iTunes!"

Then the music company would actually make money because it was played in public. If someone hears it in public then they might like it and buy it for themselves.

And even if not, it's for the freakin' holiday's! Of all the times to be charitable and nice these jerks decide to sue people who aren't hurting, and might even be helping, their record sales!

Can I get sued for playing one of my CD's at a huge party of 100 people now too? Where is the line drawn here?

i hear you. but songwriters earn their living by having their music played...
would it be acceptable if i copied the nike logo and sold "nike" shoes on the street? to me i see no difference, because that is how i make a living and if someone used one of my songs with out paying licensing i don't make rent.

did you know that sirus radio is refusing to pay for licensing...?
because its a new medium... satellite radio...nice little loop hole their trying to make...