June 16, 2005 12:45 PM PDT

Hopes for legal music podcasts rise

(continued from previous page)

handful of music podcasters have worked to persuade labels that they're not in the business of distributing free music. They're akin to radio, and are happy to look for ways to assuage labels' fears, he said.

Pathway to a podcasting license
A few potential compromises have come up as Ibbott and others have talked to labels.

If the most important part is to ensure that the songs they broadcast aren't used as substitutes for purchased music, podcasters could agree to use a format that doesn't provide CD-quality music, such as 128-kilobyte-per-second MP3s, Ibbott said. They could also wrap their podcasts in some kind of copy protection as a condition of using music legally.

"My goal is 100 percent to do this legally. I'm not out to be the next rebel."
--Brian Ibbott, home disc jockey

In return, he said, labels might create a podcasting license similar to that for Webcasters, which would allow digital DJs the right to use music as long as they pay an appropriate royalty fee.

For their part, the labels aren't saying much yet. One top label source said discussions are going on, but that it would not yet be accurate to say that the industry is making a concerted effort to develop a plan.

"One of the things we're working on is trying to figure out what the right podcasting business model is, and if there are ways to protect the content once it's distributed," said another major label record executive, who asked to remain anonymous.

The podcasting thaw isn't limited to recording labels. Music publishers say they're also looking for a way to provide noncommercial podcasters with an affordable, practical way to pay their licenses.

Any agreements could substantially change today's rough-and-ready world of podcasting, but there are plenty of other issues to be resolved. Digital rights management, in particular, could add controversial twists, since different brands of MP3 players support different copy-protection tools and sometimes support none at all.

But if that's what it takes to bring music podcasting into the legal sunlight, Ibbott said he's willing to make the sacrifice.

"If that's the case, so be it. I'd gladly do it," Ibbott said. "My goal is 100 percent to do this legally. I'm not out to be the next rebel."

Previous page
Page 1 | 2


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Legal music in podcasting isn't difficult or expensive
I'm a fan of Coverville and against Brian Ibbott, but his podcast is not the only one dealing with music issues.

ANY podcaster using copyrighted music without paying the license fee and/or the written consent of the copyright owner is in violation. Copyrighted music is protected under the auspices of basic intellectual property rights. Podcasters shouldn't be complaining about that; they should be either willing to adhere to the law or stop using the copyrighted music in their podcasts.

IMAO, podcasters should stop whining about the big bad music corporations and license their music like the bloggers at www.IMAO.us have done 100% of the time.
Edited for SPAM content.
[Edited by: admin on Jun 20, 2005 10:53 AM]
Posted by (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That's a whole lot of...
...spamming your website, especially since it's clear from your post
that you didn't read the article.
Posted by bbatsell (57 comments )
Link Flag
SPAM Alert
That "site" is just more right wing talk stuff, and if you want to listen to that, you can get more than enough on AM radio, and its more entertaining on the radio.

Methinks it is SPAM.
Posted by (274 comments )
Link Flag
"Methinks"? What are you, the geeky Amish?
I guarantee that if Brian Ibbott was a so-called "right winger," none of you would care about his idea for podcast licensing. Instead, you'd all type in your smarmy HTML code-language posts for Brian to "<sarcasm>ask his friends at the big evil corporations that control the recording industry to give him a break on the licensing</sarcasm>"

Yeah, that level of discourse sounds really open-minded...

If YOU did any research, you'd know like I do that Ibbott pays a few hundred bucks a year to music publishers for the songs in his podcast. Ibbott knows he's in something of a legal gray area and wants to get a "podcast license" set up ASAP to be 100% legal (like the IMAO Podcast has been since Day One).

Then again, if I knew that the copyrighted music I was using in my podcast wasn't 100% kosher and put me at risk of being sued at any moment by the RIAA over my podcast because my podcast was lavishingly praised on...

-CNET's News.com
-The New York Times
-The San Jose Mercury News
-USA Today
-National Public Radio

...I guess I'd probably be working to create a whole new music licensing scheme to "cover me" too.

Then again, the IMAO Podcast is 100% legal and doesn't have to worry about it. I wonder why those evil lying liars of the right wing can be compliant with the law but the trustworthy and honest opposition wants to break those laws and then justify their criminality as "opposition to a bad law"?

I'm right here, CNET. Just contact me anytime...
Posted by (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.