The U.S. Supreme Court has left standing a federal appellate court's ruling that downloading a sound recording from the Internet does not constitute a "public performance" of the recorded musical work under federal copyright law. 

A U.S. Court of Appeals in New York had held, in a case brought by not-for-profit American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), the the download itself did not meet the definition of a public performance under U.S. copyright law. ASCAP appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the appellate court ruling would have profound implications for the nation's music industry, costing its members tens of millions of dollars in potential royalties each year.

The issue in the appeal was a section of the Copyright Act stating that to perform a work means to recite, render, play, dance or act it either directly or by means of any device or process. "Music is neither recited, rendered, nor played when a recording (electronic or otherwise) is simply delivered to a potential listener," the appeals court ruled.

Washington attorney Theodore Olson, a former solicitor general who represented ASCAP in the appeal, said the appeals court ruling improperly narrowed the right to perform copyrighted musical works publicly and placed the United States in violation of intellectual property treaties and other international agreements.

The United States opposed the appeal, saying that the lower court correctly interpreted the existing statute.

The Supreme Court denied the appeal without comment.

The Supreme Court case is ASCAP v. United States, No. 10-1337.

i enjoy reading your post... thanks

hey 
  ya lot of people are embedding you tube videos from recording artists. I agree with you .

hey
You definetly need permission from the owner of the music video before you embed it.
 Many of the music videos on youtube and other video sites  are uploaded by random users.
either you have to suffer a copyright issue on this.
 

Hello,
In Louisiana, there are special procedures which must be followed in medical malpractice cases. For example, in Louisiana, a claim must be filed with the State before a lawsuit can be filed. This claim is then reviewed by a panel of three Louisiana doctors, who give an opinion about whether any health care provider committed malpractice.Only after the panel has reached its decision can a lawsuit be filed. There are many complicated details to this Louisiana panel procedure, and many traps for the inexperienced Louisiana attorney

About a month ago someone i know started looking for opportunities in the field but, since this is brand new for him, he has been slowly getting familiar with the requirements.
He has visited the FA website but nothing -except the requirements- are posted there and there is nothing clear about who to talk to to actually get a job or the proper trainning.

Any suggestions? is there any way?
If you wanna be a lawyer you apply to law school but if you wanna be an air trafficcontroller you....?

Hello dude...
Welcome to the forum..You are at the right place where your questions will be answered very quickly and you will also get some useful tips,suggestions and other value able information....

Hello,
In Louisiana, there are special procedures which must be followed in medical malpractice cases. For example, in Louisiana, a claim must be filed with the State before a lawsuit can be filed. This claim is then reviewed by a panel of three Louisiana doctors, who give an opinion about whether any health care provider committed malpractice.Only after the panel has reached its decision can a lawsuit be filed. There are many complicated details to this Louisiana panel procedure, and many traps for the inexperienced Louisiana attorney

good to be here.

According to a news report from Reuters, Europe's highest court ruled on Tuesday that eBay may be liable for trademark infringement of sellers on the internet auction site if it plays an active role in their use. The auction site may also have to actively monitor its sellers to ensure their offers for sale comply with trademark laws, the court ruled.

The case arose from allegations by L'Oreal, the world's largest cosmetics maker, that the sale of branded goods on eBay infringed its trademarks. L'Oreal's objected to a number of different issues:

• the sale on eBay of samples or testers explicitly marked "not for sale."
• the sale of counterfeit goods
• the availability of goods to consumers in the European Union that were meant for other markets

The court ruled that EU trademark rules do apply to offers for the sale of goods which are physically located outside the EU if it is clear that those offers target EU consumers. It also said EU national courts should assess if any offer did target EU markets, but that in some cases exemptions from liability offered by EU laws may might not apply.

While the case is directed at eBay, the effect of requiring that a site that provides a mechanism for buyers and sellers to connect to monitor and even become liable for the trademark infringement of its users may have far reaching consequences.