First it was record companies suing Napster and peer-to-peer file sharers, and then it was media companies such as Viacom, Universal Music Group, and Agence France Presse suiting Google, YouTube, and Facebook for distributing content whose rights they owned. Now GateHouse Media has filed suit against another newspaper firm, the New York Times Co., for publishing content from its websites and papers on Boston.com.
That media companies are suing each other is a sure sign of the maturation of online distribution and that money is starting to flow—albeit slowly and at levels far below that of traditional media, which still account for more than two-thirds of all consumer and advertiser expenditures
But the lawsuits really point out the weakness of revenue distribution for use of intellectual property online. In publishing, well-developed systems for trading rights and collecting payments exist. In radio, systems for tracking songs played and ensuring artists, composers, arrangers, and music publishers are compensated are in place and working well. The trading of rights for television broadcasts and mechanisms for payments to owners of the IPRs are well established.
However, effective systems are absent in online distribution and the industry needs to move rapidly to establish them. If the industry can not create such a system on their own, more money will go to lawyers and the rules and systems for online payments will ultimately be imposed by courts or legislators who tire of the governmental costs for solving disputes and enforcing the rights.
Organizations representing print and audio-visual media need to sit down with their major counterparts in online distribution to create a reasonable mechanism by which rights are traded and revenues shared, otherwise they risk imposition of a government imposed compulsory license scheme that will be less desirable to the industry.
Companies that continually argue there should be less government regulation of media operations can’t increasingly go to government to solve their disputes without expecting it to produce more regulation.
Blog Archive
Popular Posts
-
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case concerning vulgarity on the airwaves -- you know, Bono using the F-word in an unscripted br...
-
By Jerry Del Colliano There is a military term for a situation caused by too many inept officers -- clustering -- referring to the insignia ...
-
I was just blown away when I saw the front page of Inside Radio Friday in which they described the results of their special survey on voice...
-
With the NCAA's March Madness annual collegiate basketball frenzy underway, I see too many parallels to the music media business to not ...
-
Clear Channel went private yesterday at long last. Thomas H. Lee Partners and Bain Capital Partners are in charge now. They are investment ...
-
It's hard to fathom that a consumer electronic device that is both so cool and so hot may have finally peaked. In my work with college s...
-
All too often lately the major broadcast groups have been firing able and talented people to save money. Last week CBS pulled off a double f...
-
The introduction and suspension of media services is becoming a regular occurrence and the combined effects of multiple false starts is crea...
-
The Big Trend: Social Networking Not just Facebook and MySpace. The concept of building a social network around almost anything and having...
-
Sounds funny doesn’t it. Like a headline in a consumer publication. You know, where the reporter always ends the article with “stay tuned” ...