Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mc32 1958 days ago
Copyright holders often act in bad faith, non-copyright holders as well. We see both all the time on YouTube. Yet people continue to proceed in bad faith without repercussion.

I do know lots of small businesses (pop-ups) use streamed media -so do company picnics and so on. It’s a thing. Officially I’m sure ASCAP frowns on this. On the other hand it’s a fruitless pursuit.

1 comments

It’s obviously up to rights holders to decide what they would like to do. ASCAP is probably largely not interested in policing mundane and mostly personal uses of music in public places; especially a one-off event like a company luncheon, where relevant legal exemptions (at least for broadcast radio) exist. Seems like a case of not much to gain with a bit to lose.

However, it might possibly become a different story in this case. Here is a pretty objectionable use of copyrighted music on a small scale. It makes copyright holders look bad because the system they lobbied for could now possibly be used to help corrupt or abusive police officers escape accountability and censor opposition. Ordinarily, a copyright holder taking action against a small scale case like this would seem like a David and Goliath situation, but in this case the “little guy” is not the person playing the music.

Acting in bad faith is, of course, one thing, when you are an individual and you are acting against a large conglomerate. It doesn’t justify the action, but the optics of enforcement are not great. Just remember issues like Mike Rowe Soft for example. (P.S.: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not...)

This case is more complicated because the perceived wrong is not exactly the use of copyrighted music but how copyright systems are being used against a citizen exercising their rights.

It remains to be seen what happens, but if this sort of behavior continues I can at least bet on musicians not being very happy to hear when their music is used for this purpose.