May 3rd, 2006
Murdoch and Myspace
Despite being a very peripheral and part-time myspace-er, I’m intrigued by an article in The Register found via Thumped about new small print introduced since Rupert Murdoch acquired the company. The article quotes from another piece on Freechildsafeweb.com that states:
New terms introduced after News Corp’s acquisition of MySpace, extend the website’s rights over any content their users upload.
They give MySpace “non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free” worldwide license and sub-licensing rights “to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute” any matter posted by its users, including “messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials”.
“Content posted by you may remain on the MySpace.com servers after you have removed the content from the services, and MySpace.com retains the rights to those copies,” it adds.
Does that mean that even if I tell every band I know who have music on myspace to remove it, that it can still be used by Murdoch and co. in the future?
Good thing I don’t have my blog over there or Murdoch would own it…
May 3rd, 2006 at 4:32 pm
hmmm..that is worrying.. but not surprising..
May 3rd, 2006 at 4:35 pm
can someone verify this? pretty scary if true. kudos to whoever spotted it, well done.
May 3rd, 2006 at 4:51 pm
Scary. Still there’re enough serious bands on My Space with serious record company stakeholdings that any attempt by Murdoch Inc to exploit their copyrights gratis should end up in court w/o requiring any Davids to tackle the Goliath.
Of course, they might do a deal over the Davids’ heads…
May 3rd, 2006 at 4:52 pm
of course, the new rules couldn’t apply to content uploaded prior to the Murdoch buyout.
May 3rd, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Mike, all I know is that The Register article quotes Freechildsafeweb.com (an organisation that encourages/lobbys for safe behaviour/use of on myspace and the quotes here are from the myspace small print.
Copernicus, I hope that if such stringent copyrights are to be enforced, that at least anyone with content up there pre-Murdoch will be fine. As you say, there are enough bands with major label backing for this to be contested if it becomes a widespread issue, but smaller bands and independet labels might lose out.
May 3rd, 2006 at 8:24 pm
Some other crowd tried this before on another MySpace like site. Seems the business people did it without upper managerial approval or having proper lawyers check it. They changed it back after a back lash. Doubt it would hold up in court anyway. EFF would be all over their ass.
May 4th, 2006 at 11:34 am
Jesus, I was going to set up my own page this weekend but I own copyright my work and that the way its staying -and actually how can this work if you dont sign away copyright and dont authorise usage how can they own the rights to use it?
Im worried this is dodgy in the extreme.
May 5th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
to all concerned…
I don’t think artists with published or registered “unpublished” works need worry, as murdoch’s crappy terms and conditions “contract” simply cannot overule iternational laws no matter what it says. Those of you who don’t, I wouldn’t give him shit…
p
May 5th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
to add, All artists out there should register themselves and their individual tracks with IMRO or MCPS regardless of whether they’re releasing them or not, that will more than likely save your ass…
May 5th, 2006 at 4:41 pm
Note the Bootnote on the article this all came from.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/03/myspace_terms/
May 5th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Just reading this and I really think it’s shocking.
I’ve verified it myself, and it all is true… here is the paragraph in question copied and pasted.
# Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com.
1. By displaying or publishing (”posting”) any Content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, “Content”) on or through the Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com, a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services. This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Services. You represent and warrant that: (i) you own the Content posted by you on or through the Services or otherwise have the right to grant the license set forth in this section, and (ii) the posting of your Content on or through the Services does not violate the privacy rights, publicity rights, copyrights, contract rights or any other rights of any person. You agree to pay for all royalties, fees, and any other monies owing any person by reason of any Content posted by you to or through the Services.
http://collect.myspace.com/misc/terms.html?z=1 is the address for the terms and conditions.
May 5th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
John, thanks for that, the note wasn’t there the first time I read the article.
Thankfully they’ve changed the policy.
May 5th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
Murdoc is a piece off ~*iguana*~.
This cannot be legal.Just let me see that decrepid old warlock take my songs, I have 456+ witnesses to prove that my songs are my songs.
Also seeing as Murdoc is 90, if he dies before any of this happens,does that mean this rule doesnt apply or what?
May 6th, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Good spot, worrying stuff indeed. However, doesnt the above paragraph just say that myspace can do do whatever they like to the content, within myspace?
“(with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and DISTRIBUTE SUCH CONTENT ON AND THROUGH THE SERVICES.”
So isnt that just saying that they can use your content within myspace as they like, buts its not like they can grab your music and use it for a Coke ad without asking you. At least, thats what I hope its saying. Murdoch…….what a horrible little bag of filth….
May 8th, 2006 at 10:34 am
worrying news. i’m sure there are thousands of songs on myspace containing samples that haven’t been cleared. there’ll be further difficulties arising there…
Thanks to Sinéad for posting this article
May 9th, 2006 at 10:23 am
BTW, registering a songh with IMRO or MCPS does not prove copyright ownership and does stand up in court as a means of proving copyright. It simply sets up the way in which royalties relating to the song will be paid out. If there is a copyright dispute, IMRO/MCPS stand aside and assitionally suspend royalty payments on the work until the copyright issue has been resolved. Just thought I’d let you know so people do not erroneously rely on this for copyright purposes.