Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Music Publisher Concerns over Viral-Video Sites
The Internet has presented numerous challenges to the music industry. Unlicensed digital downloading has been at the top of the list for several years. More recently, the use of music on viral-video Web sites has produced a new set of challenges. Three of the four major record labels have struck content deals with mega-viral-video site YouTube, as have two of the three major TV networks. But music publishers haven't been involved in significant direct viral-video-site negotiations. In the following interview, conducted by Entertainment Law & Finance Editor-in-Chief Stan Soocher, Keith C. Hauprich, Vice President, Business & Legal Affairs for Cherry Lane Music Publishing Company, Inc., discusses music-publishing concerns in the viral-video age. As General Counsel for one of the world's largest independent music publishers, Hauprich's responsibilities include coordinating relationships with outside counsel, overseeing the due-diligence process and playing an integral role in finding new business opportunities for the company.
EL&F: Why haven't music publishers been engaged in ongoing negotiations with viral-video sites?
Hauprich: Music publishers took a wait-and-see approach and allowed sites and users to enjoy an online experience without clearing rights. Now, music publishers are having an uphill battle bringing these sites to the negotiating table. But viral-video sites are going to live and die by their content. It's important for content owners and their administrators to have a say in this revolution ' or evolution ' to protect the rights to underlying music compositions. Working through these viral-video issues is on everyone's short 'to-do' list.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?