beraj.blogg.se

JUDICIAL CONSENT AMAZON PDF
JUDICIAL CONSENT AMAZON LICENSE

The Economic Framework for Analyzing the Rate Structure Issues The Bargaining Room Theory in the Present Proceeding The Bargaining Room Theory in Historical Context The “Bargaining Room” Rate-Setting Theory Under Section 801(b)(1) The Economic Basis for the Four Itemized Objectives The Legal Basis for the Four Itemized Objectives The Rate-Setting Standards in Section 801(b)(1) The Licensors: Publishers and Songwriters ALTERNATIVE DETERMINATION OF RATE STRUCTURE AND RATES The Majority Decision Unlawfully Delegates to Private Entities, Unrepresented in this Proceeding (the Record Companies), the Ability to Set the Section 115 Royalty Rates The Majority has not “Determined” Statutory Rates The Majority Opinion is Legally Erroneous The Majority Denigrates the Parties' Ten- Year Rate Structure as a “Rube- Goldberg-esque” Device.

The Majority Makes the Heroic Assumption that the Major Record Companies will Docilely Accept Millions of Dollars in Lost Revenue, by Agreeing to Accept Lower Sound Recording Royalties The Majority Opinion Causes Injury to Licensees and Licensors The Rate Structure Adopted by the Majority was not proposed during the Proceeding. The Majority Opinion Lacks an Adequate Basis in the Record

DISSENTING OPINION OF COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGE DAVID R.

Limited Downloads and Interactive Streaming Factors B and C: Fair Income and Returns and Consideration of the Parties' Relative Roles Factor A: Maximizing Availability of Creative Works to the Public The Four Itemized Factors in Section 801(b)(1) Royalty Rates for Non-Revenue Bearing Service Offerings Royalty Rate for Incidental Digital Phonorecord Deliveries Professor Gans's “Shapley-Inspired Approach” Deriving Royalty Rates From Shapley Analyses The Two Subpart A Benchmarking Approaches Rejection of Services' 2012-Based Proposals Eisenach's Ratio of Sound Recordings-to-Musical Works Eisenach's Two Methods for Estimating the Mechanical Rate

Direct Licenses Between Parties Potentially Subject to a Section 115 Compulsory License Rejection of the Copyright Owners' Approach Judges' Conclusion Concerning Rate Structure

Greater-Of Percent of Revenue/TCC Rate Structure 2012 Settlement as Rate Structure Benchmark Arguments Concerning Elements of the Proposed Rate Structures The Services (Excluding Apple and Google) Effects of Streaming on Publishers' and Songwriters' Earnings Changes in Music Consumption Patterns and Revenue Allocation This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links Headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents. This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the Provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts. Rendition of the daily Federal Register on does not Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML

Legal research should verify their results against an official edition of

The official SGML-based PDF version on, those relying on it for The material on is accurately displayed, consistent with

While every effort has been made to ensure that Regulatory information on with the objective ofĮstablishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.įor complete information about, and access to, our official publications Informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal This prototype edition of theĭaily Federal Register on will remain an unofficial Each document posted on the site includes a link to theĬorresponding official PDF file on. The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official It is not an official legal edition of the Federal This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the dailyįederal Register.

JUDICIAL CONSENT AMAZON LICENSE

JUDICIAL CONSENT AMAZON PDF