Re: Broadcasting dilemma

Terry Carroll <carroll[_at_]tjc.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Jul 1997, Laurie Lye <llye[_at_]acad.cc.whecn.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Could someone kindly guide me to a concise source which would explain
> > the law on playing music over loudspeakers in a private business?
>
> This is pretty concise, although whether a particular piece of equipment
> meets the definition is always open to argument:
>
> Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the following are not
> infringements of copyright:
>
> (5) communication of a transmission embodying a performance or
> display of a work by the public reception of the transmission on
> a single receiving apparatus of a kind commonly used in private
> homes, unless -
> (A) a direct charge is made to see or hear the transmission; or
> (B) the transmission thus received is further transmitted to the
> public;
>
> This is from section 110 of the U.S. Copyright Act.
>
> > The scenario: Two businesses, one a fast food restaurant, the other
> > an antique mall, want to have music playing. They would prefer not to
> > be forced to subscribe to the cable services providing music. May
> > they play music they have privately recorded, or the radio? What
> > are their rights/responsibilites?
>
> The above provision allows them to play an ordinary radio in their
> business -- but not a costly sound system not ordinarily found in homes.
> It does not extend to playing their own recordings (e.g., a tape of
> selected tunes).

The home type exemption does exist. Please be sure to get an accurate definition of home type. You may wish to look at a case involving Claires Boutique or Edison Brothers Stores for more information on home type.

Bob Pauley
National Sales Account Executive
SESAC
rpauley[_at_]primary.net Received on Fri Jul 04 1997 - 14:25:40 GMT