Collection Society To Libraries: No Story Time For Kids Unless You Pay To Read Aloud

Collection Society To Libraries: No Story Time For Kids Unless You Pay To Read Aloud
If there's a common trait of the various rightsholders groups around the world, it is their sense of entitlement. If anyone does anything with a work under copyright, they feel they have a right to regulate it and be paid for it. A good example is the claim by the Authors Guild that owners of Kindles weren't allowed to use an experimental text-to-speech feature, since that would infringe on the entirely made up concept of "audio rights" -- and hence, presumably, require further payment.


Something that is both stupid and sensible depending on your point of view.

It's the same as lots of online issues. As people have been doing it for years everyone is outraged, people can't understand why these companies are doing it.
Wheras the companies are basically keeping hold of their rights that exist by the laws of all lands, and have done for ages and making money out of their rights.

If companies had been doing this sort of thing all along then we'd all think it's totally normal and acceptable (after all this sort of this is normal in other arenas, music transmission in public places requires a PRS license in the UK for example, normally use of songs needs no permission from the artist, just payment, if you were a or boxer coming out to a certain song for example) . Being able to do something doesn't stop you having to follow rights and permissions even if they've never bothered enforcing them before.

Saying that it's bloody stupid and ridiculous and will obviously be dropped at some point.

Open, and multi-language, too.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.