Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

RIAA Sues XM Over Recording Device

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

May 17, 2006, 11:33 AM

XM Satellite Radio's receiver difficulties continued Tuesday as it was sued over the new Pioneer Inno device, and partner Audiovox halted shipments of its Xpress Model radio due to a FCC request. The news follows an earlier disclosure by the company that the FCC had ruled the SkyFi2 was not in compliance with its emission standards.

The RIAA's lawsuit, filed in a federal court in New York, alleges the satellite radio provider is committing "massive wholesale infringement" of copyrights by allowing users to save songs heard on the service to the device. The suit claims that users who have the device would no longer have a need to purchase digital music.

The RIAA is seeking $150,000 for every song that is copied by customers who bought the player since it was first released earlier in the month. It also takes issue with XM's marketing of the device, saying it promotes saving of songs.

XM said that the Pioneer Inno is no different from a person recording from terrestrial radio, which has happened for years. Furthermore, it cannot transfer content, nor is it an on-demand service, unlike iTunes.

The satellite radio company accused the RIAA of attempting to use litigation to gain an upper hand in negotiations to renew licensing contracts. XM says record labels of attempting to prevent innovation and consumer choice by limiting how they can record broadcasts, which have long been ruled legal by U.S. courts.

Both XM and Sirius are currently renewing their licensing deals, and the labels are looking for increased fees as satellite radio becomes more popular. XM had attempted to negotiate for portable content, but the labels wanted iTunes-like deals, which XM apparently balked at.

Legal problems are not XM's only worries. Audivox said Tuesday that it would stop shipments of its Xpress Model XM receiver due to a request from the FCC. The regulating agency said that the unit did not comply with operating bandwidth or related emission specifications.

An internal review is underway at Audiovox, and the company gave no time frame for the resumption of shipments with the issue remedied.

Add a Comment (57 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By almaky

edited Oct 19, 2007 - 1:29 PM

Ok, Getting confused in all this hoopla about downloading and copying from this or that. I have read many articles about the subject and i'm still lost. My ??? is that when i turn on my computer and i see a picture on the news from say "MSN" that a person took and sold to the MSN to be put on their web page. Do i have to pay for it if i use it. You know ( alt+print screen) Is making a copy or printing it off for my use illigal and if it is then why is the picture out there to begin with. Better yet then the whole internet, Google,Yahoo,Ebay, all of them are illigal and the copying of words or catch phrases is illigal. But if you really want to copy songs correctly. Then do this. Use a radio with line outs to your computer and use a audio surgan to cut and buffer the commercals out. Then you can put those on your MP3 player. If you listen to rock, classical, country-- in a weekend you can get 200-300 song to work on at your leisure. Free and no risk. Now i also have many cassetes from the 80's but after time they start to fade or rott away- is putting them on a cd to protect them for my own use illigal. Also what do i do with scratched cd's that are not playable. I have a disc buffer but after time you still have skips on them. So if you make a copy to have so the music doesnt skip is that illigal?

Score: 0

By SorenMD

posted May 18, 2006 - 10:18 AM

Good ole' RIAA... bringin everyone down with them.

Score: 0

By xprizex

posted May 18, 2006 - 4:59 AM

The Record Companies make one master recording and then make millions of copies. I heard that a CD including packaging costs about $0.13 Which means when they sell a CD for $20 they make more than 15000% profit. And I thought the oil companies were greedy.

Score: 0

By dwaterman

posted May 18, 2006 - 2:25 PM

Do you honestly think it costs 13 cents to produce a cd? Even if that covered the cost of actual cd and case it doesn't account for the studio time, promotion, shipping or the money the artist makes. Get real...

Score: 0

By foolscrow

posted May 18, 2006 - 7:41 PM

Actually, when you factor the number of copies produced by the big labels (millions and millions in some cases), its more like $.20. Most promotion is done with radio play (where a free copy is given), and on average most artists only make a few cents per copy sold.

Most of the band's that aren't opposed to downloading will tell you that they make their money on tour, and thru merchandising.

Score: 0

By joeshmoe7

posted May 18, 2006 - 12:19 AM

I should have listened to my role models and went to law school :(

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 18, 2006 - 1:14 PM

hahaha.. Its not too late man!

Score: 0

By The-One

edited May 18, 2006 - 12:03 AM

I wish the goverment would let the RIAA die. A new organization would take over, and probably not have a 1920's business model. This is the grossest form of embezzlement I have ever seen.

We need to launch a campaign and march on DC, maybe we could be heard then.

Score: 0

By beard

edited May 17, 2006 - 8:43 PM

What is really scary is that courts and congress have bowed to the windfalls of money and influence. This is nothing else, but a racketeering attempt.

Score: 0

By bigsexy022870

posted May 17, 2006 - 10:38 PM

I am so fricking tired of the RIAA and there bullcrap. They makes billions, and never do there profits take a tumble, even with piracy. They need to stop hammering every fricken thing that comes down the pipe. People have recorded radio shows and songs for decades. HEY REMEMBER TAPES, THEY RECORDED STUFF STUPID'S. Just cause recording nowadays is digital is no reason to get all anal. I know guys who have Hundreds of VHS tapes of tons of crap from decades ago. They will do it regardingless of the qaulity. So the RIAA should have tried this crap back then. And since they didnt they have no reason to complain now. They lost there chance.

Score: 0

By tscar12

edited May 17, 2006 - 10:14 PM

Once aqgain we see an RIAA that has to much power but don't forget that the courts are also responsible because they have generally back up this facist organization. Riaa tried this same tactic in the 80's wehn cd's and cassettes were in use and the courts shot them down. The courts ruled that as long as a person made copies and didn't try to sell them it was ok to record.

Score: 0

By rla0001

edited May 18, 2006 - 2:31 AM

During the Clinton administration the DMCA was passed. The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use, but if the recording has some protection scheme or DRM and you defeat it to make a personal archive you become a criminal. So, in effect, the industry slaughtered fair use and used our legislators to get it done. Thats why you hear them ranting about how you must buy a new CD if your old one bites the dust.

Forget the idea that the industry was bragging up how CD's would last decades when they were pushing the tehnology on the public back in the 80's.

Given the track record of the recording industry (payola, shorting royalties, creative accounting, etc.) I find it amazing that congressmen are so quick to jump in the industry bandwagon and pass some of the legislation we have seen.

Coming around the corner is a new initiative that will force devices including TVs and Radios to implement the broadcast flag scheme by 2009. Then you wont even be able to time shift or digitally record TV programming with the flag enabled by the broadcaster.

Any guesses as to how legislators are being motivated to pass these technology killing measures?

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 18, 2006 - 1:17 PM

*The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use*

Show me the proof of this. Show me a website, where this is true. Because its NOT. The property is OWNED by the manufacturer, if THEY don't give you EXPRESS permission to do so, the goverment isn't going to support you.

If you read the article it states that its legal to copy *IF* the owning party doesn't have STRICT restrictions and copy protection AGAINST it. If they don't specifically say you can copy it, then you can't LEGALLY copy it, READ!

Score: 0

By rla0001

edited May 19, 2006 - 12:28 AM

"The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use, but if the recording has some protection scheme or DRM and you defeat it to make a personal archive you become a criminal."

OK we will start with this web site:

http://www.usg.edu/legal/copyright/#part1

If you still are not convinved here is a link to the RIAA website, where the RIAA openly states that copying CD content for personal use is OK:

http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp#stand

If after reading you still have issues with my statement please let me know. I will be happy to provide several resources on personal copying under the fair use doctrine.

Score: 0

By The-One

edited May 18, 2006 - 12:07 AM

Big money, big payola!

Finally a good post. This is all to preserve a dieing business model for the RIAA. If the government would leave them alone, they could die out and another, more deserving, entity could appear.

I think we should hit congress from all angles and get recordings in libraries, that would be the single greatest thing to stop them!

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted May 17, 2006 - 8:13 PM

So, let me get this straight... if I plug in an XM to my soundcard, and record on my computer, that's legal. If I record onto the hard drive in the unit, that's illegal?

I thought a long time ago we established that taping/recording off the radio was legal. You can't sell it, and that's cool. No selling bootlegs.

Someone with the device, please tell me if I'm wrong, but that audio is effectively trapped on the device, is it not??

Score: 0

By dwaterman

posted May 18, 2006 - 3:53 PM

So, let me get this straight... if I plug in an XM to my soundcard, and record on my computer, that's legal. If I record onto the hard drive in the unit, that's illegal?

XM's terms of Service:

You may not reproduce, rebroadcast, or otherwise transmit the programming, create unauthorized recordings of the programming, charge admission specifically for the purpose of listening to the programming, or distribute play lists of the Services.

With that said the music that you are copying from xm is protected under its own terms and its being broadcast on xm or any radio station has no bearing on those terms. Hence, this lawsuit...

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 18, 2006 - 1:20 PM

ah, you are forgetting, radio is a re broadcast with commercials, you want to record that crap, go ahead.

XM is digital 5.1 high quality recordings, on a PRIVATE network (you have to subscribe to get it).

This is what the lawyers will say, I am not disagreeing with you, I am just saying that they will argue there IS a difference.

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 17, 2006 - 8:36 PM

Nice point drumcat!
Wonder what the RIAA thinks about that.

Score: 0

By enloquecido

posted May 17, 2006 - 7:59 PM

I think that if it goes much further out of control the RIAA will seek to hospitalize anyone found humming one of their tunes and the MPAA will hospitalize anyone claiming to have invisioned a scene from their movie in order to preform a lobotomy. Lets not inform them that the human mind is capable of storing data. Humans are on the verge of becoming an illegal device.

Score: 0

By cousinkix1953

posted May 17, 2006 - 7:53 PM

XM satellite radio can be used with somebody else's recording devices; so the RIAA accomplishes nothing. I was happy to see that the ALLMAN BROTHERS and other artists have filed a lawsuit against a crooked RIAA member company.

SONY is one of the biggest pushers of blank media and devices to make pirated music and movies. Throw those hypocrites in jail for ripping off their own artists and add ad extra time for the computers destroyed by their damned root kits...

Score: 0

By foolscrow

posted May 17, 2006 - 7:14 PM

"Fair use" shot in the a** again...

The RIAA has been given entirely too much power. What's next, suing anyone who manufactures a stereo that has a tuner and tape deck? After all, that would allow you to record what's on the radio. That won't happen (yet) and here's my opinion on why.

The issue is that you can get a recording at cd quality, supposedly (I'm not an XM subscriber, so I can't comment on the audio quality). The RIAA didn't give much of a rat's a** about making copies of tapes or recording radio, until there was a way to do the same things digitally, without loss of quality over generations of recording. Now that we, the consumer, have the ability to protect our investments, they're up in arms.

Score: 0

By jsc315

posted May 18, 2006 - 12:02 PM

the quality isnt even FM quality. far below what a Cd would sound like. its total BS.

Score: 0

By AntiochMedia

posted May 17, 2006 - 6:28 PM

This is how the RIAA makes money, right?

Score: 0

By rla0001

posted May 17, 2006 - 5:18 PM

If the RIAA were to persue and win this case based on the per violation provisions there would be no more XM Radio. If XM has sold 1000 recording devices and each user records only 100 songs (and at 400 bucks per player you got to know they have) that is 100,000 x 150,000 = $15,000,000,000.00 (15 Billion Dollars).

This is the kind of power our legislators have been handing the RIAA members and this is exactly why people have got to get involved in this war against buying our government. The idea that any recording from radio is worth more than a few cents is just incredible. Under present law the industry has been handed the power to coerce many corporations into bankruptcy. Future legislation may well prevent the development of technologies that could be vital to our future and security. We passed the point of legislated copyright absurdity years ago, yet the industry is still whining for more laws to punish citizens and eliminate fair use.

It is past time for people to get up and start communicating with their senators and congressmen. There is very little time left.

Score: 0

By skimore

posted May 17, 2006 - 2:43 PM

I have NEVER heard a song worth 150,000.. WOWW must have been a great song..

Can some ask for FULL discloser of ALL RIAA company books. So the artists can get paid???

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:15 PM

Besides that, its impossible to know who actually downloaded the song.. I may be an XM subscriber, which I am not, but I were I could have downloaded it to my player, they would never know. Its satellite, its not by-directional, so there is no way they can determine who had the song, and who didn't.

I know 150k still seems rediculous even for 1 song, but its not about the song, its the principle and they want to make it clear that you are not to do it again, that's how serious it is.. at least to them.

If you were late from curfew, and your parents told you to be home by midnight, you were 1 minute late, maybe they take away allowance, phone and force you to stay home for a week. That would suck, and you would probably protest, and you would be highly upset that the cost was so high.. But you wouldn't be late again, now would you?

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 17, 2006 - 8:39 PM

So how are they going to charge 150000k for each song downloaded when the RIAA has absolutily no proof of downloads.

Score: 0

By TomL_12953

posted May 18, 2006 - 9:20 AM

That's one of the problems. It seems like they don't NEED proof that anything was actually downloaded, they only need to show that the POTENTIAL was there! The laws have gone crazy.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:35 PM

But you wouldn't be late again, now would you?

Hell yeah!

But then again, I *was* kind of a problem child....

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:52 PM

You? A problem child? Wow imagine that..

That is surprising.. :) I can't imagine you don't conform to rules, huh.. Well I'll be..

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 2:56 PM

Artists need to file a class-action against their labels and the RIAA.

The labels for royalties, and RIAA for recovered funds from lawsuits, etc.

The only way to fix this is to tear it down to the bones and rebuild it.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted May 17, 2006 - 2:07 PM

This cracks me up (copied from http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/092702_2.asp)... [quote] Myth: The IRFA is designed to help small businesses.

Fact: The overwhelming majority of artists are themselves small businesses, who struggle to earn a living through making music. The IFRA will directly harm these artists – by denying them royalty payments – in order to subsidize webcasters that earn revenues of $6 million.
[/quote]

"struggle"??? I guess they forgot to cancel those MTV Cribs episodes. Ooops!

Score: 0

By ds0934

edited May 17, 2006 - 1:56 PM

Get ready for more cavity searching. The Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006, sponsored by R/TX Lamar Alexander will bolster RIAA and MPAA efforts, while punishing consumers to near death. Read about it here:
http://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/hr2391 Say goodbye to your MP3, TiVo and DVR toys also.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 2:58 PM

Already got 'em.

I'm keeping them.

Ain't no-one coming into my house to take 'em away without getting up close and personal with my shotgun.

And yes, I realize that makes me look like some hick from Alabama. Maybe they've got the right idea (About property rights, not sleeping with cousins/siblings)

*grin*

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted May 18, 2006 - 9:26 AM

They don't need to get physical. They can simply control our abilities remotely. DVR's can be sent code updates over the wire. Satellites will control our cars and our dogs. Black helicopters will follow every one of us everywhere we go. Hee hee hee... Ok, putting down the crackpipe now..

Score: 0

By pjlasl

edited May 17, 2006 - 1:22 PM

Take the record button of all electronic appliances! Sue all the maker of electronic devices that can record!!! Remove all blank tapes/cd/dvds from the stores!!!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:11 PM

Remove all blank tapes/cd/dvds from the stores!!!

But....How will I back up my, uh... Adult Cinematogrophy library?

Score: 0

By dvferret

posted May 17, 2006 - 8:41 PM

yah, lol. What about my videos i want to back up that i um.... made myself?

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 17, 2006 - 1:14 PM

As a sirius subsciber, I can only say one thing..

-ahem-

Hahahahahahahaha.. AAAAA hahahaahaha..

Thank you.

Score: 0

By fictionles

posted May 17, 2006 - 4:41 PM

Ahhh rijp, I was wondering where you were.

As a Sirius subsciber(?), is this why your company doesn't have a portable player yet? Or are they going going to bow to the RIAA and not include one?

Score: 0

By sd.green

posted May 17, 2006 - 1:10 PM

Another one! What is this Lawyer heaven or something? MS had it right when they spawned the 'Right to Innovate'. I guess American companies no longer can. Something has to give here, either stagnate via Court actions, else change the system to a more logical one. The R!AA is just taking it for granted that IT is god. They want ALL the money from music. Screw them.

Score: 0

By jsc315

edited May 17, 2006 - 12:46 PM

**** the damn RIAA. theres nothing wrong with the device at all. The myfi can do the same thing as the inno. the biggest diference is you can put mp3's on the inno. This has already been delt with back in the 80's. Its just technology making it better. The sound quality from xm is aqutaly worse than if you were to record from an FM station. The RIAA and FCC have no right to butt in, Damn greedy basdards. so now everytime i record a song xm gets sued. well ive recorded well over 500 songs with the inno, so thats $75,000,000. yea that makes sence?
where are they getting this number,for $150,000 for one song. The RIAA have lost there minds.

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted May 17, 2006 - 12:04 PM

If this was a radio that recorded to a cassette, would anyone care? No. Yet somehow this is a huge infringment. It hasn't been for 30 years, but now that the device is a magnetic disc and not a magnetic tape, their panties are in a bunch.

I really wish the FCC, FTC, or whomever wants to gain political favor would throw these boneheads under the bus...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:12 PM

would throw these boneheads under the bus...

...and film it.

Imagine the Box-Office totals on *that* baby. That alone would fund the film industry for generations.

Score: 0

By TomL_12953

posted May 18, 2006 - 9:23 AM

...but pirated copies of it would be on the Web in no time! 8^)

Score: 0

By foolscrow

posted May 17, 2006 - 7:15 PM

Something like that would even get the pirates in the theater...

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted May 17, 2006 - 12:24 PM

Agreed completely. I wish judges will just throw out their case, and any cases in the futures. When was the last good thing that come out of RIAA? Every time they made headline, they are SUING.

Score: 0

By drumcat

posted May 17, 2006 - 8:07 PM

...or sending attack dogs after pirates... :)

Score: 0

By Reap_r

posted May 17, 2006 - 11:57 AM

I like the term Pigopolist as coined referring to the music labels. They are arrogant and greedy. There is nothing wrong with seeking to profit from your work, but they go to far by trying to criminalize legal behaviors because it could conceivably allow or influence a user to not have to buy 3 copies of the same product just so they can listen to it in diffent places.

The RIAA is not interested in helping its members compete in the market using innovation or competition. There appears to be no limit on how low they will stoop to make that extra penny.

I love capitalism but it does require that we all play by the same rules. The RIAA and their ilk have their own rulebook and it includes a lot of dirty behavior.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted May 18, 2006 - 8:47 AM

you forget, its not even their work, all they do is press albums and transport them to stores, i mean they do a bit more than that, but all the real work comes from the artists who get assraped by the riaa on royalties.

Score: 0

By straes

posted May 17, 2006 - 11:49 AM

If this isn't the RIAA just making themselves look like greedier idiots I don't know what it is.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:13 PM

Suing a dead grandma for using it?

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:21 PM

Ah stuff falls through the cracks, I don't think it was intentional. Grandma alledgedly downloads song, the justice system takes 2 or 3 years for the case to come to trial, they didnt bother to check (especially when they have 50,000 cases pending) each and every defendent, by the time it went to trial, she died.

If they can give a credit card to a dog, I think grandma should be given some lee way too. At first it seems rediculous, but its not so crazy when you think companies get information that is out of date, and they rely on call centers .. that is another story.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:34 PM

...and my above comment was a simple joke...

Thanks for the short novella, though. ;P

Score: 0

By rijp

posted May 17, 2006 - 3:54 PM

Well maybe I am oversenstive today.. People keep going off on weird things..

Sorry here let me amend my comment..

Hahaha.. that was funny, grandma got run over by a RIAAdeer.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted May 18, 2006 - 8:51 AM

hahahahahahaha
thats possibly the funniest thing ive read in months...

Score: 0

Sep 5 - 8:44 PM ET Mozilla's Aza Raskin: The journey back to Ubiquity

Sep 5 - 7:10 PM ET Red Hat buys virtualization specialist Qumranet

Sep 5 - 7:06 PM ET Analysts: Online news viewers rising as newspaper readership falls

Sep 5 - 6:55 PM ET Where does Sarah Palin stand on technology issues?

Sep 5 - 6:51 PM ET Adobe Flash to deliver NFL games in full

Sep 5 - 4:29 PM ET Exclusive beta invitation from GameTap and BetaNews

Sep 5 - 4:09 PM ET Report: OLPC buy one, give one deal returns

Sep 5 - 3:45 PM ET No ruling yet in TiVo vs. EchoStar patent case

Sep 5 - 3:37 PM ET Google Analytics starts tracking Chrome, with intriguing results

Sep 5 - 2:14 PM ET Comcast challenges FCC's authority in sanction appeal