April 26, 2024

You are here: Home / Archives for entertainment industry

Media Decoder Blog: For Music Industry, a Story of Two Googles

February 21, 2013 by Leave a Comment

When it comes to the music industry, there are two Googles. And the difference between them leads to a complicated and fraught relationship.

Digital Notes

Daily updates on the business of digital music.

One Google is represented by its suite of entertainment media services like YouTube and Google Play, which have licensing agreements with the major labels and music publishers, along with movie studios and other media companies. That side is slowly becoming integrated into the fabric of the entertainment industry, through deals like the one announced by Billboard magazine this week that it would start incorporating YouTube play counts into its chart formulas.

The other side of Google is its mighty search engine, the road map to the Internet, which people use to find content of all kinds — some of it preferred by the entertainment industry, but a great deal of it not. This is the side of Google that has the most frequent and public fights with the entertainment industry (though, to be sure, media companies have had no shortage of conflict with YouTube over the years).

The latest incarnation of Big Media vs. Google search is a report issued on Thursday by the Recording Industry Association of America, or R.I.A.A., accusing Google of failing to make good on its own promises to punish pirate Web sites. In August, Google said it would take into account notices of copyright violation — of which the music industry files thousands each week — in determining a site’s search rank. The implication was that infringing sites would fall into obscurity and consumers would “find legitimate, quality sources of content more easily,” as Amit Singhal, a senior Google executive, wrote in a company blog post at the time.

But the recording industry association, which is controlled by the major record companies, said that after testing Google’s searches, it still found plenty of infringing sites. “Six months later, we have found no evidence that Google’s policy has had a demonstrable impact on demoting sites with large amounts of piracy,” the report said.

At one point in the 15-page report, for example, the R.I.A.A. says that for many popular music searches, sites for which Google had received more than 1,000 copyright complaints were “almost eight times more likely to appear in the top 10 search results than a well-known, authorized music download site.” The report also shows, however, that sites for which Google has received more than 10,000 copyright removal requests appear less frequently than those which have received more than 1,000.

In response to the report, a Google spokesman said in a statement: “We have invested heavily in copyright tools for content owners and process takedown notices faster than ever. In the last month we received more than 14 million copyright removal requests for Google Search, quickly removing more than 97 percent from search results. In addition, Google’s growing partnerships and distribution deals with the content industry benefit both creators and users, and generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the industry each year.”

The second part of that statement is where the two sides of Google collide, at least as far as the music industry is concerned. At the same time that the record labels are accusing Google of failing to deal with piracy, Google is also eagerly pursuing licensing deals to use and sell the labels’ music. Those deals frequently need to be updated to keep up with industry trends, an area in which Google has lagged behind competitors. It introduced a download store only in 2011, for example, and a licensed “locker” service — a way to store music and other files online — late last year, well after Apple and Amazon had done the same.

There are many reasons why licensing negotiations between technology and media companies take a long time — just ask Spotify, which took nearly two years to enter the American market. But as long as the search side of Google causes friction with the music industry, its other side — the one that is trying to compete with Apple, Amazon and every other digital music service out there — will face some rough patches.

Ben Sisario writes about the music industry. Follow @sisario on Twitter.

Article source: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/for-music-industry-a-story-of-two-googles/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Media Business Tagged With: , ,

Media Decoder Blog: In Dispute Over Ray Charles Songs, Family Gains Victory in Court

January 31, 2013 by Leave a Comment

A dispute between the children of Ray Charles and the foundation to which he left most of his money is the latest battleground in one of the entertainment industry’s most contentious issues: the “termination rights” that allow artists and their families to recover the copyrights to their work from third parties like record companies or publishers.

Last week a federal judge in California ruled that the Ray Charles Foundation cannot interfere with the efforts of seven of Charles’s 12 surviving children to recover the music publishing rights to about 60 of his classic songs, like “I Got a Woman,” “Hallelujah I Love Her So” and “Mary Ann.” The foundation, a nonprofit charitable organization founded by Charles in 1986, currently receives royalties on those songs.

In a further blow, the judge, Audrey B. Collins of United States District Court in Los Angeles, also ruled that the foundation must reimburse the children for their legal expenses.

The case combines the drama of a family fight over a celebrity’s legacy with a detail of United States copyright law that poses a threat to the entertainment industry. An amendment to the law that took effect in 1978 let artists recover rights to their work after 35 years; the rule also applied to works copyrighted before 1978, but after 56 years. Artists can do this by officially “terminating” the agreements that had transferred the work to other parties.

In the music industry, most of the concern about these cases has been about whether record companies and publishers would prevail over artists by claiming that their music was “work for hire” — in other words, as an employee — and thus exempt from termination claims. But the Charles case also reveals how complicated these claims can be when they involve deceased authors and their wills.

The case was triggered in 2010 when Charles’ children filed termination notices for the songs with their publisher, Warner/Chappell. Last year, the foundation — which includes former business associates of Ray Charles but no members of his family — sued the children, saying that they did not have the rights to reclaim the songs’ copyrights, and that they had also breached agreements with their father. Before Charles’s death in 2004, most of his children signed agreements saying that in exchange for $500,000, they would make no further claims on his estate after he died.

Judge Collins ruled against the foundation, saying that the law gave rights to surviving family members of a deceased artist, which cannot be superseded by any other agreement — including a will.

Valerie Ervin, the foundation’s president, said it would appeal the decision. “The very clear and unmistakable intention of both Ray Charles and all his children was that, in exchange for a substantial payment, the children were not to raise any claims against their father’s estate,” Ms. Ervin said in a statement. “The children who filed these termination notices violated the sacred promise they made. They took their father’s money and now come back for more. The law is very unsettled in these matters and we intend to seek resolution through the courts.”

The judge also approved a motion brought by the Charles family to dismiss the suit under laws against so-called Slapp suits, or strategic lawsuits against public participation, which obstruct free speech and petition. As part of that victory, the judge ruled that the foundation must pay the family’s legal fees, which will be determined later.

“The decision is important for authors/artists and their families everywhere,” Marc Toberoff, the lawyer for the Charles children, wrote in a statement. “A disturbing trend has emerged where adversely affected companies initiate frivolous legal action to chill the exercise of the Copyright Act’s inalienable termination right. By holding that termination is protected under anti-Slapp statutes, which include a mandatory award of attorneys fees, those who pursue such strategies do so at their own peril.”

Ben Sisario writes about the music industry. Follow @sisario on Twitter.

Article source: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/in-dispute-over-ray-charles-songs-family-gains-victory-in-court/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Media Business Tagged With: , ,

Media Decoder Blog: Under Copyright Pressure, Google to Alter Search Results

August 11, 2012 by Leave a Comment

6:58 p.m. | Updated
Big media companies won a battle in the fight to combat online piracy on Friday when Google said it would alter its search algorithms to favor Web sites that offered legitimate copyrighted movies, music and television.

Google said that beginning next week its algorithms would take into account the number of valid copyright removal notices Web sites have received. Web sites with multiple, valid complaints about copyright infringement may appear lower in Google search results.

“This ranking change should help users find legitimate, quality sources of content more easily — whether it’s a song previewed on NPR’s music Web site, a TV show on Hulu or new music streamed from Spotify,” Amit Singhal, Google’s senior vice president of engineering, wrote in a company blog post.

The entertainment industry, which has for years pressured Google and other Internet sites to act against online piracy, applauded the move.

“We are optimistic that Google’s actions will help steer consumers to the myriad legitimate ways for them to access movies and TV shows online,” Michael O’Leary, a senior executive vice president for the Motion Picture Association of America, said in a statement.

Cary Sherman, chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America, also commended Google’s move. “Google has signaled a new willingness to value the rights of creators,” he said in a statement.

But the two men expressed caution and urged Google to carry out the change with the vigor it adopted in combating pirated videos on YouTube, which Google owns.

“The devil is always in the details,” Mr. O’Leary said. While Mr. Sherman added, similarly, that changing the search algorithm “is not the only approach and of course, the details of implementation will matter.”

The announcement comes just over six months after a heated battle between big media companies and technology companies, who were sparring over proposed legislation intended to crack down on pirated online content, particularly by rogue foreign Web sites.

In January, media companies like Viacom, Time Warner and the Walt Disney Company backed two antipiracy bills, one in the Senate and the other in the House of Representatives, while Internet activists and companies like Google and Facebook argued the bills would hinder Internet freedom. Buoyed by a huge online grass-roots movement, and aided by Wikipedia’s going black for a day in protest, the bills quickly died.

That tension has decreased somewhat as media companies have met with Silicon Valley executives over how to solve the problem to everyone’s satisfaction.

Google said it would not remove pages from copyright-infringing Web sites from its search engine unless it received a valid copyright removal notice from the rights’ owner. “Only copyright holders know if something is authorized, and only courts can decide if a copyright has been infringed,” Mr. Singhal said.

Google said it had received copyright removal requests for over 4.3 million Web addresses in the last 30 days, according to the company’s transparency report. That is more than it received in all of 2009.

Amy Chozick is The Times’s corporate media reporter. Follow @amychozick on Twitter.

A version of this article appeared in print on 08/11/2012, on page B2 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Under Copyright Pressure, Google to Alter Search Results.

Article source: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/google-to-alter-search-results-to-reflect-a-sites-history-of-copyright-infringement/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Global Business Tagged With: , ,

Hollywood Labor Fight Looms as Money for Benefits Wanes

November 28, 2011 by Leave a Comment

LOS ANGELES — Bitter disputes over health and pension payments to union members have created plenty of drama in states and cities this year. But do not look for a movie about it — Hollywood will be too busy dealing with a labor crisis of its own.

After three relatively peaceful years, the entertainment industry is bracing for a showdown next spring. At issue is an enormous projected shortfall in financing for some of the most jealously guarded perks in show business, the heavily gilded health and pension plans.

No one is talking of a strike yet. In fact, no one with official standing is talking publicly. Leaders of the industry’s craft and blue-collar unions and officials of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, which represents the studios and other production companies, have all declined to discuss what will happen when several contracts expire July 31.

But in town hall meetings over the last two months, union leaders have told members that weak industry economics, a tough investment climate and, above all, sharp increases in health care outlays are expected to create a $500 million shortfall by 2015.

“We’re going to be asking for money, lots of it,” Matthew Loeb, the president of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (I.A.T.S.E.), told a gathering at the union’s Local 80 here in late September. His union represents about 50,000 set designers, makeup artists, grips and other film workers.

To put things in perspective, the contract that in 2008 settled a three-month strike by Hollywood’s writers was estimated to include total pay and benefits increases of less than a third that amount over three years. A subsequent, hard-fought three-year deal with the Screen Actors Guild, with about 120,000 members, cost the companies only about $250 million. One person involved with the pension and health plans, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the situation, called the looming half-billion dollar shortfall “staggering.”

The workers represented under the stage employees’ contracts have been known more for making deals than picking fights. In years past, the union might have been at the bargaining table a year before the contract deadline; this time talks may not start until spring. The last full-blown craft strikes occurred more than a half-century ago, and involved a different configuration of unions; Hollywood’s Teamsters, the other major union headed for a 2012 showdown, have not staged a major strike since 1988.

But the current situation is volatile, partly because the Teamsters and some allied unions who share health and pension plans with I.A.T.S.E. aligned the expiration of their contracts with those of the larger theatrical workers alliance by shortening their last contract cycle to two years.

This time, those unions are expected to bargain jointly on health and pension issues. A walkout would instantly stop film and television production in the Los Angeles area, and would affect production in New York and elsewhere, because editors, camera crews and some others are represented on a national basis.

Hollywood’s guilds largely resolved their health and pension problems, at least for now, in several agreements over the last year or two. But the craft workers and other film laborers got caught in a whipsaw that involved the financial markets, changes to federal health care law, and some features that are peculiar to the financing and benefit structure of their plans.

In some ways, Hollywood’s blue-collar health plans are more generous than those covering actors, writers and directors, who are usually regarded as being higher in the pecking order.

At the gathering in September at Local 80, John Garner, a health care consultant with Levey, Garner Isaacs, told I.A.T.S.E. members their plans matched or exceeded those of the guilds and others in deductibles, office visit co-pays, member contributions and other measures.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=e4831e551f5d34b08f06ac28ff8cc980

Filed Under: Business News Tagged With: , ,