Subscribe: Comments on: The Library of Congress and Copyright Royalty Judges
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
don  fact  feed  government  judges  library congress  library  loc gov  loc  matt raymond  matt  might  part  royalty judges  royalty 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: The Library of Congress and Copyright Royalty Judges

Comments on: The Library of Congress and Copyright Royalty Judges

"Light and liberty go together."

Last Build Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 00:37:20 +0000


By: tvsm22

Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:43:47 +0000

I don't see much of a problem, maybe i don't understand someting

By: Matt Raymond

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:29:17 +0000

Eric, if you go to our main RSS page and scroll down, you will see that there are four different Copyright-specific feeds. Keep in mind the thrust of this post, though; Copyright and the Copyright Royalty Judges are separate entities, so it is possible that you might not get as much information as you might hope this way. I don't believe the Judges have set up an RSS feed yet, although the "federal register" feed at the link I just gave might capture some of that.

By: Eric

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:28:37 +0000

Matt, I would like to hear updates on this. Is there a way to get updates via your RSS feed regarding strictly the copyright news?

By: Webdesign

Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:44:08 +0000

I hope that they solve this problem as soon as possible , to many people are affected by it already !

good luck

By: Matt Raymond

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:35:10 +0000

Wassabi, the Library of Congress is part of the Legislative Branch of government, not the Executive Branch. I am the communications director for the Library, so I am just stating the facts, including the fact that many webcasters say the decision will put their future in doubt. However, it is not my place to argue policy here.

By: Dave

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:19:32 +0000

I guess part of confusion might lay in the fact that the link for the CRB is That would obvious lead people to belief its part of the LOC. FYI regarding the increase, my favorite station that broadcasts online is looking at a six figure plus bill due to the new ruling.

By: Wassabi Cracker

Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:06:14 +0000

So that's it, huh? You're not going to explain to anyone about how the administrative appeals process works? Any government body which has knowledge about the procedures which sorround this fiasco of a process has a duty to share that knowledge with the public, particularly in times of duress, it's called sunshine. It really appears as if LoC has been "captured" by special interestes, just like every other government institution in the last 7 years. It really seems like the LoC is just another instrument in a wave of exploitative and pro-monopoly policy by this administration. Regardless of the fact that many will lose their jobs (including those egotistically seeking to be referred to as "judges"), how do you deal with the burdens on your conscience about the fact that THOUSANDS of voices are about to go silent (each with a story)? Isn't this a blow to American culture? Having the boundaries of our speech -free or commercial- weilded by the personal business interests of dominant market incumbents? And you post a crappy 5 paragraph "oh well, its not us" response. Definitely not what the framers had in mind, or even Mr. Reich (The New Property) and those drafting the Admin. Proc. Act.