|
|
Listening to radios at work is illegal
PRS attempts to sue Kiwk-Fit for £200,000 of damages for copyright infringement via employees’ radios
Is there anything you can do with music that doesn’t make you a thieving, blood-thirsty pirate in the eyes of the music industry? If you were going to be a truly law-abiding citizen then you wouldn’t copy any of your music to use for your car or MP3 player and, apparently, you wouldn’t listen to a radio at work either.
It’s all about copyright infringement, which is something that the Performing Rights Society (PRS) takes very seriously. So seriously, in fact, that it’s currently suing Kwik-Fit because its employees’ radios could be heard by customers and work colleagues and thus infringes copyright.
PRS appears to have had its eye on Kwik-Fit for some time, and according to the BBC has ‘lodged details of countrywide inspection data over the audible playing of music at Kwik-Fit on more than 250 occasions in and after 2005.’
Lord Emslie, the judge at a procedural hearing at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, told the BBC: 'The key point to note, it was said, was that the findings on each occasion were the same with music audibly "blaring" from employee's radios in such circumstances that the defenders' [Kwik-Fit] local and central management could not have failed to be aware of what was going on.’
Okay, so central management probably did know what was going on, but it’s probably fair to say that they didn’t really care as thousands of workplaces across the country have a radio at work that can be heard by colleagues and customers. Is this a fair case for copyright infringement or a case of the music industry being too heavy handed? Let us know your thoughts.
Via BBC News.
Reddit | Technorati
Come on the radio stations pay to broadcast it, then we pay to listen.... Its a public service......... Why are the politicians allowing this to continue, maybe the PRS are vetting there expense claims, no what I mean.
Comment by johhny at 12:47pm 16th August 2008
Come on the radio stations pay to broadcast it, then we pay to listen.... Its a public service......... Why are the politicians allowing this to continue, maybe the PRS are vetting there expense claims, no what I mean.
Comment by johhny at 12:47pm 16th August 2008
Isn't the radio for advertising the song's (ehem) everyone needs to buy? Not that i buy trash pop anyway but doesn't that benefit the (EHEM) artists?
Comment by Jux_Zeil at 9:56pm 17th October 2007
They are obviously only interested in money. They do not care if they are right or wrong, they do not care for the rights of music industry and the rights of artists, the more they sue the more money they make - in the end it is a business - they all just want to get paid at the end of the day and if they do not sue anyone or enforce what they "say" is wrong they will not get paid and might as well be gone. Basically if they win there will be many many more actions of the same kind where a guy in a nice car will wait in a parking lot for a wife to come out of the market and will be playing music a bit loud and he will get sued. It is up to people to stop them. Suggestions such as hacker retaliation, illegal downloads will not help or stop them, what is needed is for a community that is concerned about the problem to stand up and do something about it. If a majority of people wants to change something they can very well do so - you can fight against individuals and if hackers or illegal download sites pop up - it will automatically give them an opportunity to claim that they are the victims and will provide them with the protection of the law, you can not however fight against people - 60 - 70 % of people in a community say that something is not right, sign a petition and force your local councils and lawmakers to make it law. In some cases state law can trump federal law. The above might not be possible due to majority of people mistakenly believing that we live in democracy - we do not we live in a republic. Democracy is where people make decisions by voting on all issues, we currently choose people to make those decisions for us hence we live in republic and if music industry as a interest group donates enough then that person that has to make a decision in this case "might" see things in the same way that PRS sees them.
Comment by NewUser at 10:27pm 11th October 2007
They are obviously only interested in money. They do not care if they are right or wrong, they do not care for the rights of music industry and the rights of artists, the more they sue the more money they make - in the end it is a business - they all just want to get paid at the end of the day and if they do not sue anyone or enforce what they "say" is wrong they will not get paid and might as well be gone. Basically if they win there will be many many more actions of the same kind where a guy in a nice car will wait in a parking lot for a wife to come out of the market and will be playing music a bit loud and he will get sued. It is up to people to stop them. Suggestions such as hacker retaliation, illegal downloads will not help or stop them, what is needed is for a community that is concerned about the problem to stand up and do something about it. If a majority of people wants to change something they can very well do so - you can fight against individuals and if hackers or illegal download sites pop up - it will automatically give them an opportunity to claim that they are the victims and will provide them with the protection of the law, you can not however fight against people - 60 - 70 % of people in a community say that something is not right, sign a petition and force your local councils and lawmakers to make it law. In some cases state law can trump federal law. The above might not be possible due to majority of people mistakenly believing that we live in democracy - we do not we live in a republic. Democracy is where people make decisions by voting on all issues, we currently choose people to make those decisions for us hence we live in republic and if music industry as a interest group donates enough then that person that has to make a decision in this case "might" see things in the same way that PRS sees them.
Comment by NewUser at 10:27pm 11th October 2007
Prs (if memory searvs me correctly) are the people who collect and distribute royalty's to artist's. (i'm still waiting for my first check!) All this has done is make them seem even more (if that's possible) like money grabbing fatcat's. Eventually all this bad publicity will backfire on them!! (well we can only hope!)
Comment by ramos001 at 9:43pm 11th October 2007
bands that play covers at concerts/festivals? new traffic/prs laws issuing people playing stereos in their cars/vans? Illegal operation of home sound systems while windows are open? Yes pubs do have to have broadcasting licences but they don't play the radio, they have jukeboxes or automatic systems of some sort. Radio is a public broadcasting service and whether or not a few people overhear it is irrelevant because it is a free public service and therefore is not illegal whoever's ears it falls upon at whatever circumstance. This just sounds like the same busy-body, must-do-something-to-prove-they're-worth-paying gits that inhabit all the 'special' advisory panels and quango's at whitehall. PRS are useless and I hope the judge orders them all to be sent to a mental home in North Korea
Comment by EdArch at 11:04am 10th October 2007
The radio is there so the public can hear it...I mean for crying out loud why must they be so petty!!
Comment by PyrO_PrOfessOr at 8:09pm 8th October 2007
It is clear that radio stations pay royalties each time a record is played. Musicians want exposure yet they also understandably want to protect copyright. The PRS would be better served fighting for increased pay for low paid members, for example orchestral musicians. In essence the PRS are seeking to extend copyright to all unintended public broadcast, which could conceivably encompass thousands of pimped car sound systems, workplaces and even an inconsiderate iPod user with loud headphones. However, I would have thought that the prima facie issue is: 1. Whether Kwik-Fit were intending the music as entertainment for customers (perhaps they provide a TV in the customer waiting room and many customers if questioned would treat the music as noise nuisance). 2. In mitigation it could be argued that a) It would be unsafe for workers to use personal headphones b) Acoustic attenuators could not wholly prevent noise breakout from the work area to the customer seating area and would be both unworkable and prohibitively expensive c) Periodic music has been shown to increase worker productivity Should the PRS succeed in this action they will alienate a large part of the population and like MediaDefender deserve hacker retribution.
Comment by SeveBC at 6:52pm 8th October 2007
unfortunely any shop or pub that plays music for customers have to have a broadcasting liecense. i have worked in the retail industury for a good few years and that has been the case as far as i can remember. u can have a radio in the staff area so long as its not played to customers.
Comment by Zealot69 at 5:33pm 8th October 2007
surely all this will do is potentially decrease record sales?
Comment by mredvers at 5:23pm 8th October 2007
One day the music industry will realise that what is killing the music industry is the music industry, not the fans or artists.
Comment by LordBlacknose at 4:06pm 8th October 2007
I really can\'t believe this. I mean if they were listening to a copied CD on a player then there might be a slightly better case, but the radio, everyone and anyone has access to the radio, the whole point of it is you can listen to music for free. Does this mean if I walk down the street with a radio playing so that other people can hear it I would get sued by the PRS. I think every company should now play the radio in there offices. If it was at all possible I would also love to see what happened if absolutly nobody bought any CDs, and downloaded it all illegally. The music industry are just digging there own grave, making people annoyed that they can\'t do anything with the music they legitimatly buy and making these people less happy with the music industry to the point where they don\'t want to buy stuff. I purchase all my music, mostly downloaded from Tescos and Woolworths, but if there was a worldwide/nationwide illegal download to prove to the music industry that \'we don\'t care what you say\' then I would certainly take part.
Comment by Cerberus_xiii at 4:06pm 8th October 2007
The whole idea about radio is that it is broadcast to anyone who can recieve it. How can they say that the listener is infringing on copyright?? The radio station is surely doing the same by broadcating it then!! What a pile of c%^p!!
Comment by spikey0321 at 4:01pm 8th October 2007
Sorry if the implied language is too far, i notice the previous post was cleaned.
Comment by mr_nips at 3:52pm 8th October 2007
I agree PRS can [deleted] off and die. Useless money hoarding middlemen.
Comment by mr_nips at 3:47pm 8th October 2007
can all [deleted] off and die for all I care, any sympathy I had for the wishes of the music industry who wished to protect their rights has gone totally out the window. Does this mean that TV shops which show live TV in the windows ought to be shut down too, [deleted] no!.
Comment by DudQuitter at 3:47pm 8th October 2007
Do they think they are putting an a freaking music show or something! Whether they are allowed to or not by the managment all they are doing is listening to the radio (which is free to do) while working lmao! So does that mean my company is breaking copyright law by my drivers playing the radio/music in thier cars while driving poeple about even if i tell them not to? Or what about playing the radio/music in my office while people wait for a taxi? Its all going a bit too far in my eyes, you wont be able to go for a shit whithout getting sued or something sooner or later lol.
Comment by prim8 at 12:24pm 8th October 2007
i hate this crap, i'm in a band and if i was famous (say) then i woudln't care about that, in fact it's more liekly to make popel go "oh whats' that music" and then go and buy it (or tell all their friends they hate it if its crap) they should be going after people who download it all off kazaa and the like. the prs are as far as i can tell also completely self appointed, and they exist for reasons i dont understand.
Comment by wegreenall at 12:08pm 8th October 2007
Sorry, Custom PC comments are now closed.
- Acer reveals Windows 7 release date
- EA loses $1 billion
- AMD losing less money than last year
- Researchers create new thermal material
- Nvidia releases ForceWare 182.65 drivers with ambient occlusion
- Rumour control: AMD releasing Athlon II before September
- Rumour control: Nvidia considering buying stake in VIA
- Valve promises to make DRM obsolete
- Play the latest games regardless of your hardware
- Rumour Control: Radeon HD 4890 details leaked
These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.
- Phenom II overclocked to 6GHz
- GeIL unveils Cyclone RAM cooler
- Rumour control: GeForce GTX 260 GX2 in January
- Nvidia cuts price of 216 SP GeForce GTX 260
- VIDEO: PC version of Mirror’s Edge features hardware PhysX
- Get Half-Life for less than a dollar on Steam
- IBM plans to build virtual human brain
- RivaTuner 2.20 adds SLI and CrossFire support
- VIDEO: ArmA II trailer released
Mobile Broadband
Fastest, cheapest 3G mobile broadband dongles from 3, Vodafone, T-Mobile and Orange
from just £10/month
