Wedding Crasher: Canada To Impose Retroactive Charges For Playing Songs At Weddings

I have repeated complained about the runaway copyright and trademark laws — and the failure of politicians to protect the public from draconian penalties and thug-like actions by the industry. Now, the industry is targeting weddings — retroactively — to impose fees for playing that rendition of “Because You Loved Me” to be sure that Celine Dion gets her cut from the happy couple.

The Copyright Board of Canada has long been accused of being an extension of the industry and approved new fees to play recorded music at large gatherings, including weddings. For events with fewer than one hundred people, you will pay $9.25 per day. For a reception of 400 guests, the fee will be $27.76. However, that is only if you want to save money by barring your guests from dancing. If anyone dances, the fee goes up to $55.52. Now you know why Carrie Underwood says “I hope you dance.”

The industry is looking at bringing in an additional $100 million in new fees by raiding weddings and other events.

The new fees are retro-active to 2008 and Canada will now be dispatching an army of wedding crashers — inspectors who will enforce the fines.

One would think that the industry would not want the public backlash over retroactive and future fines for wedding songs, but the industry has learned that it has nothing to fear with politicians falling over themselves to curry favor with lobbyists around the world. Groups like the RIAA appears to have an open revolving door for members or staff who help it out in hammering citizens. For example, Mitch Glazier, Senior Executive Vice President, is heralded on the RIAA website as responsible for the draconian laws being used against citizens. The website states that “[b]efore joining RIAA, Glazier served as Chief Counsel for intellectual property to the influential Judiciary Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he helped draft and steer into law a series of copyright reforms including the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, and the 1997 No Electronic Theft Act, among other key intellectual property laws.” RIAA then gave him a job and a huge amount of money. The RIAA was long criticized for its lavish expenditures on members of Congress. Congress has not only given the RIAA what it has demanded but has put its lawyers on the federal bench. In the meantime, legislators are falling over themselves to give more powers to RIAA lawyers.

It is not clear if there will be a fine if the wedding couple stays in their seats and merely hums a few tunes.

Source: CTV

20 thoughts on “Wedding Crasher: Canada To Impose Retroactive Charges For Playing Songs At Weddings”

  1. You do realize why Obama is bringing this up now?

    He and his are scared that what they’ve been doing for years will be exposed, causing a big stink.
    Maybe even a Congressional investigation (=coverup). Maybe a citizens investigation. Etc.

    So what do we do in the form of effective protest? That’s my theme for now. Protest, for democracy does not seem to work through the political system.

    March on Washington? While spectacular, it would be stopped before reaching Washington, or simply subverted.

    Arrangers could be government agents backed by agencies. Stardard part of the training. Diverted to staging areas, where arrangments breakdown causing the necessity of public “rescue” operations and evacuation, and thus a failed march.

    And if unruly types show up, they will be contained, and shouts of glee will emerge from those watching cable news.

    Well, what do the gerillas do? Spread out. And the corrsponding peaceful move is to do as the Greeks do.
    Have a general strike.

    Why, I’d be fired, you say. Not if enough folks, fearing for their lives, their children’s live called in sick or claiming the dangers of daring to go to work because of feared reprisals from protesters. If all said “I can’t work today”. What could they do? And one thing is certain. If the intoxication of people power strikes, then it will grow.

    Their dilemma is who do they attack. Who do we make an example of? Who do the SWAT squads attack? Which township do they gas. Which Army division mutinies first? Chaos reigns. Who then dares lead the negotiation for the opposition? We have no Barradie.

    I won’t draw it any longer. But it seems to be one way. Hypothetical at least. Are we Greek enough? That’s the question.

  2. I was pondering a secret IP world, segmented of course.
    And what did I see a couple of minutes ago in the news email I get from the NYTimes. Looky-looky.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/science/big-datas-parallel-universe-brings-fears-and-a-thrill.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120605

    QUOTE:
    Out There Mystery of Big Data’s Parallel Universe Brings Fear, and a Thrill
    By DENNIS OVERBYE

    The world’s bank of digital information is growing at a rate of five trillion bits a second, and there’s a lot going on inside that we don’t know about.
    UNQUOTE

    I haven’t read it yet. Want to keep my speculations clear of influence.

    Would/could you agree hypothetically that there has been a growing cottage and then industrial scale creation of an IP world which caters to shall we say unethical or concealed practices?

    Well, suppose you are a lawyer, with a civil suit. Would it be advantageous to know the documents they are hoping not to have to reveal, the strategy, the statutes, the precedents, etc which are planned for use? Now imagine that sources could give you this info, via various data techniques.
    WOULD YOU USE THE SERVICE+

    Now let’s expand—hardly necessary is it? From academics hungry for new ideas or something to plagiarize, to companies hungry for pending patent data, to industries wanting key competitor info, to financial data. to our government in its ceaseless search for who we are, what we do, who we associate with, etc.

    And to those who say that they work off-line or in secret compartments. Secret compartments only tell those who search where to look. And if there’s an iP connection in your intranet, or your home router, then all is exposed for retrieval. All of it.

    Paranoia? Which is worse? Paranoia or stupidity?

    Everybody is gathering data about you. You do realize that, I hope. From those who provide lyrics of songs and offer to send info to your friends.

    All quite legit. Do they even mention terms of service,and if they did would you read them.

    Such ubiquitous programs as Windows Internet Explorer, the most widely used browser, provides you with a list of where you have visited.

    And Google mail uses that file to provide a searchable list of places you’ve been. And that’s just the legal stuff, and just a start for that.

    What you don’t know will hurt you. What’s yours is yours, says the Constitution, so it must be important.

    I would like to close with a paraphrase of Donald Rumsfeld.
    “What we don’t know, that we don’t know, is by far the greatest danger”.

  3. Of course the Feds have ALL the modern smart-phones prepped and the IP provider are prepped to, on as part of the sign on protocol, send up all IP-, WI-FI, IR and cable transfer of all exchanged data, Did I cover it all?

    Well, that is their intention, and they do have the expertize. What company says no to helping them, in these times?

    Ever watch the data flow stats after hook up? What goes up is lots larger than what comes down.
    As for waking the dead (IP units), Microsoft does it regularly.
    But they are punctilious (fearful of being sued?) about leaving a nice list for you to read next time you fire up with the names of what they installed. Great comfort, ehhh?

    Sometimes anonymous downloads of 1 GB will occur while I’m watching (I don’t watch much, I figure it’s already being watched). Now, that is worrisome to the civil rights minded. Maybe.

    It’s your life and your government. Right? Heh heh!

  4. I don’t know if and when you guys left reality, while I was sleeping, but if Obama has done it, then he’s asking to let him monitor all traffic as to cnntent and with whom exchanging is taking place. Ie. they get to analyze all you do and the others do on the net.

    Sounds cool???

    Ever heard the phrase: “If you ain’t doin’ nothin’ wrong, whaccha worr’n about”.

    Why bless my cousin-EFFing chile, you just go back to your tending the swamp still, and let us modern cellphoners figure this one out.

    Could it make it harder if we go over to anonymous pre-pay sims on smart cells for exchanging and off-line programs to transfer to storage?
    Or End2End encrypted?

    Now we are hooked, (forget the music bit, that is a cover (no pun intended) for serious surveillance and analysis of YOUR life) WHAT do we do about it.

  5. How are they going to enforce it? And what happens should RIAA spies be caught in the wedding? A good beating sounds nice.

  6. The feds already capture all of it. It’s just a matter of sorting it out and going after whomever they want.

  7. What Gene and Monetize Everything said.

    The FBI is already tracing ISP’s on individual complaints; that 13 year old down the street better be careful the next time he file-shares a new tune.

    They want to take it bigtime, no illegal streaming in the sports bars or online or you’ll be looking at a Federal rap, as if being the most incarcerated country in the world isn’t enough already…

    “White House wants new copyright law crackdown”

    “Obama administration asks Congress to make “illegal streaming” of audio or video a federal felony and says FBI agents should be able to wiretap suspected infringers.”

    “The White House today proposed sweeping revisions to U.S. copyright law, including making “illegal streaming” of audio or video a federal felony and allowing FBI agents to wiretap suspected infringers.

    In a 20-page white paper (PDF), the Obama administration called on the U.S. Congress to fix “deficiencies that could hinder enforcement” of intellectual property laws.”

    http://jonathanturley.org/2012/06/04/wedding-crasher-canada-to-impose-retroactive-charges-in-playing-songs-at-weddings/#more-49731

  8. Dont know if true or not that you may use the forst 16 bars before fees woud kick in. If so just have to rework it so is the first 16 bars over and over again.

  9. I know that bands are (or at least were) required to pay a fee for about everything they played and they were fined if they did not. Those being fined and the size of the fine were published in a union newsletter. A musicians’ union thing, not the government.

  10. The government trending toward service as a functionary for corporations is eventually going to be recognized by the citizenry as the fascism that it is. Only then it will be to late to do anything about it. Maybe it already is.

    MonetizeEverything

  11. Just to add: Corruption in agencies increases with swinging doors. But agencies nominally operate after laws. And who makes them?

    Ways and means for us to make a difference?

    Obams started this “tell me what you want” thingy on the WH site. Shall we start a movement to ask for an Admin sponsored bill for yearly “box” examinations of all in Congress. How many sigs and demonstrations would we need to get a media storm started.
    Isn’t that what we want? Clean politics. Where votes count for more than campaign “contributions” do.

    Well congressional individual support for the bill sohould be a good indicator who we and ev. media
    support have to hammer down on.

    Yeah, I know, I should start writing SF. But what are we doing in the meanwhile?

    We might even have effect in the current campaigns.
    What else is the OWS going to do at the Repug convention?

  12. Technology is destroying the recording (actually recording distribution) industry. That they fight this is to be expected. That it exposes the level of corruption money has on government is simply gravy.

  13. It seems that if we want justice we are going to have to buy better and more politician than the industry buys.

    Who wants to form an ad hoc committee to raise funds to get the best damn politicians money can buy.

    Lets see now if everybody who listens to music chips in the price of just one cd thats…umm…ummmm… .well millions and millions anyway.

  14. Do these fines/fees apply to the your brother’s group who covers the song?
    If you play a Pirate Bay copy, does the fine increase?
    If the gueats hum or sing a long does it cost more.
    My fingers got tired, thank goodness for you all.

Comments are closed.