Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 - OpenCongress Wiki
Views
Audio Home Recording Act of 1992
From OpenCongress Wiki
Introduced by Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, S.1623, required manufacturers of digital audio recording devices to make royalty fees to copyright holders, in addition to implementing the Serial Copy Management System to stop the production of multiple copies. It also prohibited devices that did not confirm with SCMS.
Reiterating its position, XM continues to defend its XM+MP3 device under the AHRA standard. However, in Atlantic Recording Corp.] et al v. XM Satellite Radio, Inc.], Judge Deborah A. Batts denied the AHRA exemption and XM’s request to dismiss the RIAA’s case against the satellite radio company over its digital radio/Mp3 players in a New York Federal Court. The judge found that the AHRA “provides no protection to XM” finding that XM’s product was used both for broadcasting and distributing. According to Batts, comparing XM’s product to that of the cassette-record player was inadequate because it was “manifestly apparent that the use of a radio-cassette player to record songs played over free radio does not threaten the market for copyrighted works as does the use of a recorder which stores songs from private radio broadcasts on a subscription fee basis.” [1]
In addition to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) suit, the National Music Publishers Association filed a similar suit against XM March 22, 2007 in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan. The NMPA seeks a maximum of $150,000 in statutory damages for each work infringed by XM, and lists over 75 songs as a “small fraction” of those being illegally distributed through the XM+MP3 service. Interestingly enough, the NMPA noted that after XM “announced its intent to merge with one of its main competitors, SIRIUS Satellite Radio, XM began aggressively defending against charges that the merger would create an unacceptable monopoly. XM has asserted that it is in the same market as “music subscription services, iPods, CD players and cell phones,” making clear that its unlicensed service is designed to compete with legitimate digital music download services and other distributors of recorded music.” [2]
