Launching Sunaada - internet radio station

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 05 Oct 2009, 23:05

Dear Rasikas,

Sunaada - Suswara Naada Dhaara was launched on the auspicious day of Vijayadashami. It is the one and only internet radio exclusivley for Indian Classical Music; both Carnatic and Hindustani. Tune into http://sunaada.in and enjoy the nectar of Indian Classical Music.

We would appreciate your feedback and suggestions.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 06 Oct 2009, 10:19

Satwik,
Good job! I heard MLV's beautiful rAgamAlike of PD and the visuals were very nice. Where is this teppOTsavam from?
TNK's sahAna is lovely.
Wishing you, the sati-pati team the best!
Will look in often.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 06 Oct 2009, 10:53

Nice concept - can you add the musician names (main and accompanists) so we know who is performing.

I noticed a few commercial recordings are being broadcast and hope you don't run into problems with that. A case by Charsur against MusicIndiaOnline was brought before the Madras Court for broadcast of CDs on that site.

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 06 Oct 2009, 13:32

Mohan and arasi thanks for the encouragement. We are planning on a schedule and will try to include more info. Mohan please let me know which are the commercial recordings. We would not like to get into any legal stuff.

Sreeni Rajarao · Post by **Sreeni Rajarao** » 06 Oct 2009, 19:18

Congratulations! Great job! Thank you!

Sreeni Rajarao

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 06 Oct 2009, 20:08

Thank you sir.

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 06 Oct 2009, 20:10

svkashyap wrote:Mohan and arasi thanks for the encouragement. We are planning on a schedule and will try to include more info. Mohan please let me know which are the commercial recordings. We would not like to get into any legal stuff.

Great idea well executed; M.Santhanam's stuff is commercial recording; I am willing to share my entire collection-not commercial but live full concert recordings FREE with you(1950-'75 period) [email protected] VKV

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 06 Oct 2009, 20:31

VKV sir, Thank you very much. Our intention is to popularize Indian Classical music among non-listeners. And also a channel for people who cant or wont attend concerts. Most of the stuff being played now are available freely on the internet. As of now, we are literally following Sri Purandaradasa's song - "Kereya neeranu kerege chelli"

We would not like to get into any into legal issues over commercial/copyright material.

It would be great idea if you could share concert recordings with any additional information. I am also digitizing my grandfather's collection which will take sometime to be on air.

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 06 Oct 2009, 23:40

Dear svkashyap,
If you write me email or call me at 505-6612618 I would be happy to give all the details of the project which has been ongoing for over 30 years on a project in which Digitization of concerts, lps etc has been going on; I have been consulting Lawyers in Chennai also- many of them are my friends- reg. legal issues. I can at least save you lots of time& trouble. Regs, VKV Do you live in USA OR INDIA?

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 07 Oct 2009, 04:47

svkashyap wrote:please let me know which are the commercial recordings. We would not like to get into any legal stuff.

DKJ's Kamalamba Navavarnas is a commercial recording as well.

inpursuit · Post by **inpursuit** » 07 Oct 2009, 14:45

Hi svkashyap,

I am unable to listen to the music. Even when i choose real player, it prompts me to enter userid and password but i'm not sure what userid it expects.

Can you please let me know how i can get this to work.
I also couldnt post a message from the feedback/suggestion page.

Thanks in advance for your help and cant wait to listen to all the great music.

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 07 Oct 2009, 15:23

@inpursuit,

Can you try winamp or the web player. The web player needs flash which you can get for any browser from Adobe.

inpursuit · Post by **inpursuit** » 09 Oct 2009, 14:35

Thanks svkashyap. I guess i must try it at home - my office doesnt let me download!!

Rasika911 · Post by **Rasika911** » 09 Oct 2009, 15:03

Very nice, can you please put the name of the artist(s) as well.
Who was singing palinchu kamakshi earlier today..was that ramnad krishnan?

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 09 Oct 2009, 17:24

@inpursuit
I am trying to put a different web player, since some people are unable to play this flash player.

@Rasikas11
Palinchu Kamakshi was sung by Sri Mysore V Ramarathnam. I am working on the artist info. It will take a couple of weeks to get complete info including artist names onto the webpage.

Can you answer the quiz? Or let me know if it is not clear, I'll change it (give a hint). Hope, it will be fun

Rasika911 · Post by **Rasika911** » 09 Oct 2009, 17:44

Is it going to be all recording of past musicians or are there recordings or contemporary artists as well?

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 09 Oct 2009, 21:31

@Rasikas911

This venture is in experimental stage. Currently only non-copyrighted material of past artists in is being played. Getting contemporary artists' recordings would need some legal formalities which needs to be worked out. Probably after few months it might be possible.

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 25 Oct 2009, 22:51

Dear Rasikas,

It has been four weeks since Sunaada's existence and the rasikas' response has been encouraging. Continuing the experiment, Sunaada will be playing scheduled programs starting tomorrow. We look forward to your valuable suggestions and feedback.

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 27 Oct 2009, 08:12

Dear Rasikas,

Sunaada will be broadcasting compositions of Ganakalabhushana Sri Veene L Raja Rao on 27,28 and 29th, courtesy Sri Sreeni Raja Rao.
Keep listening. Thank you.

laks1972 · Post by **laks1972** » 27 Oct 2009, 18:11

svkashyap,

not sure what you meant by "only non-copyrighted material of past artists in is being played". It gives the meaning that past artists dont have any copyrights and only living artists do have.

In India, copyright of past artists continue to hold good upto 60 years after the death of the artist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ght_length

The best approach is to take the route of sangeethapriya where only "non-commercial" recordings are shared of both present and past artists, with any objections from artists duely complied.

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 30 Oct 2009, 07:55

@laks1972
Thanks for the info and the suggestion. Will try to follow it.

I have been able to convince some of my friends who never listened to any ICM and were even unaware of it to get a hang of it on Sunaada. After listening to Sunaada many have become fans of DKJ, Gangubai Hangal, Mallikarjun Mansur.

I would consider my effort worth if Sunaada can transform at least one person, every month, who was "unaware of" or "shun" ICM into an ordinary rasika.

I would welcome any suggestions in this regard.

Thank you,
SVK

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 30 Oct 2009, 08:02

SVK,
Good to hear this. Keep it going!

gn.sn42 · Post by **gn.sn42** » 30 Oct 2009, 09:50

laks1972 wrote:The best approach is to take the route of sangeethapriya where only "non-commercial" recordings are shared of both present and past artists, with any objections from artists duely complied.

The best approach would be to obtain permissions from all the artists involved with each song, the composer of the song, and/or their heirs and successors, and to negotiate and pay fair royalties.

Non-commercial recordings are also subject to copyright. The only recordings that are not subject to copyright are those whose copyright terms have expired, or where their creators have explicitly placed the work in the public domain.

A Handbook of Copyright Law has the details. As far as I can make out (as a random internet poster with no specialized knowledge), the rights of the composer of a song and the producer of a recording last for life plus 60 years, while a performer's rights last for 25 years.

Update: The website of the Indian Performing Right Society shows the tariff for various uses. For internet radio stations it is "Rs 5 lakhs for single channel or 15% of Gross Revenue whichever is higher".

I do not know how many CM artists and recordings are represented by the IPRS. Does anyone have this information? It might be a useful mechanism for artists.

laks1972 · Post by **laks1972** » 31 Oct 2009, 11:13

gn.sn42 wrote:
laks1972 wrote:The best approach is to take the route of sangeethapriya where only "non-commercial" recordings are shared of both present and past artists, with any objections from artists duely complied.
The best approach would be to obtain permissions from all the artists involved with each song, the composer of the song, and/or their heirs and successors, and to negotiate and pay fair royalties.

Agreed, it is the ideal approach. But how practical it is to trace the heirs and get permissions is to be explored. And when multiple heirs of multiple artists (main, violin, mrudangam etc) are involved, it becomes more complex.

As long as the internet radio station does not generate any revenue by streaming non-commercial recordings and the radio station does not spoil the commercial potential of the broadcast non-commercial album, 1st and 4th factors of "Fair Use" caluse can kick in and safeguard when non-commercial concerts are broadcast.

Refer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#N ... opied_work

gn.sn42 · Post by **gn.sn42** » 31 Oct 2009, 11:53

laks1972 wrote:As long as the internet radio station does not generate any revenue by streaming non-commercial recordings and the radio station does not spoil the commercial potential of the broadcast non-commercial album, 1st and 4th factors of "Fair Use" caluse can kick in and safeguard when non-commercial concerts are broadcast.

I'm rapidly getting out of my depth here, but I don't believe streaming entire songs on the web can count as fair use. If they are excerpts of songs to illustrate a technical discussion, certainly; or if they are satirical adaptations of the song; but not entire songs simply served up for people to listen to. Also, the idea of "non-commercial albums" is irrelevant to the question of copyright (it might be relevant to the question of damages, but that is a separate thing).

Re your comment on heirs, just because things can be complicated doesn't take away copyright. Sometimes, for example, the inheritance of real property can be complex or contentious; but that does not allow a third party to come in and make use of the property.

laks1972 · Post by **laks1972** » 31 Oct 2009, 15:07

I agree with all that you have said. Happy that I am discussing with someone who knows the subject

Having said that, application of copyright to Indian music is bit difficult as it is bit different than western music.

Unlike western music, the people who wrote the lyrics and who set the tune in those days (trinity, post trinity) did so with no commercialy motives. They did not expect any royalty from anyone for reproduction

And our carnatic musicians too are rendering these compositions without bothering about copyright of the composers and in fact making money in the process. There is no wriiten approval permitting the artists to render these compositions.

Though the copyright of trinity has expired , the copyright of recent vaagneyakaaraas such as Papanasam Sivan, Harikesanallur etc have not . If any carnatic musician is going to sue the internet radio station, he/she should also be aware that he/she is singing copyrighted compositions without written approval from composers.

As you rightly said, sharing non-commercial does not absolve anyone from the infringement. It applies at the time of awarding damages when the infringement may be seen leniently.

If I have to compare sharing commercial and non-commercial music, sharing commercial music is like break-in robbery, sharing non-commercial music is like pickpocket.

gn.sn42 · Post by **gn.sn42** » 01 Nov 2009, 02:56

laks1972 wrote:Unlike western music, the people who wrote the lyrics and who set the tune in those days (trinity, post trinity) did so with no commercialy motives. They did not expect any royalty from anyone for reproduction

The situtation was exactly the same in Western music. Copyright in music is a relatively new phenomenon, and it was only broadly used starting in the mid-to-late nineteenth century. Until the Berne convention and its successors, there was no global acceptance.

laks1972 wrote:And our carnatic musicians too are rendering these compositions without bothering about copyright of the composers and in fact making money in the process. There is no wriiten approval permitting the artists to render these compositions. Though the copyright of trinity has expired , the copyright of recent vaagneyakaaraas such as Papanasam Sivan, Harikesanallur etc have not .

This is my pet peeve. Copyright first rests with composers, and these need to be respected. I urge contemporary composers to protect their rights strongly (or to clearly place their works in the public domain, or to use something like a Creative Commons license), so that everyone knows exactly how to legally use their works.

laks1972 wrote:If any carnatic musician is going to sue the internet radio station, he/she should also be aware that he/she is singing copyrighted compositions without written approval from composers.

Producers of albums are the "authors" of music recordings and they should be the ones suing (of course, more enterprising musicians will name themselves producer to have that right); performance rights have a shorter term. But while one could argue that the producers may be in violation of copyright themselves, only the composer has legal standing to do so.

laks1972 wrote: If I have to compare sharing commercial and non-commercial music, sharing commercial music is like break-in robbery, sharing non-commercial music is like pickpocket.

sagars · Post by **sagars** » 01 Nov 2009, 14:11

Not able to listen to the programmes in the home page but able to see the video of the day in the home PC whereas in laptop able to tune in everything. Any adjustment needed in home PC??

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 01 Nov 2009, 15:35

Am able to listen by using my usual media player: VLC, by clicking on the first icon (lightening flash) and entering "open with... VLC.exe".

Even better: it works with my Logitech Squeezebox (a device for streaming audio over a wireless network to a hifi, and also for connecting direct to internet radio) by just entering the same URL into "Tune to URL" in the squeezecentre software.

I am not ignoring, but neither taking part in, the copyright issues, just now. Copyright in India, especially in classical music, is like road safety: a complete mess.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 01 Nov 2009, 17:59

Two or three hours of happy listening later... Another request for the accompanist's names!

svkashyap · Post by **svkashyap** » 01 Nov 2009, 20:52

The purpose of this internet radio is to create awareness and propagate ICM, not to indulge in pickpocket or robbery. Legal issues, especially concerning internet are not well defined. Anything and everything on the internet available for free public consumption/participation (including this forum) can be theoretically proved illegal. A conscious effort is made not to broadcast any copyrighted material and also avoid damages. Whenever pointed out such material will be removed as soon as possible. It can be argued copyright, while protecting rights of composers, artists can be detrimental to growth of music. Anyway, the intention is to provide good quality music over internet. Making it legal with all formalities may take some time.

@sagars,
Try Google Chrome or IE 7. ActiveX needs to be enabled in your browser.

@nick
Thanks for listening. Working on your suggestion.

laks1972 · Post by **laks1972** » 02 Nov 2009, 17:05

svkashyap

Your response appears to bury the problems under the carpet and condone violations

Who said "Legal issues, especially concerning internet are not well defined" ?? They all have been very well defined and many judgements have been delivered based on that.

Such sweeping statements are dangerous.

If you want to broadcast copyrighted material, go ahead and be prepared for any litigations.

I was suggesting non-commercial as compared to commercial to minimise the repercussions. That will be your best bet.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 02 Nov 2009, 23:09

This is just for fun, I am not a lawyer. This is just to illustrate how crazy these laws can get and the nuances involved. I am sure these have already been talked about in courts and defendants try to use these arguments.

Consider these cases. Which ones are violations and which ones are fair use?

1) You play the music loudly from inside the house. Passers by can easily hear it.

2) You play the music from a CD player that is placed near the window. There is a crowed gathered outside and listens to the music.

3) You call your friend over the phone and play the music

4) You have a multi line phone system at home. Some lines are programmed such that when someone calls it they hear the music in progress

5) You call into a conference call and play music over the phone into the conference. Any number of people can call in and listen.

6) You set up your skype account so when someone calls you on skype they hear the music

7) You set up a streaming server and play music over it. People call into your streaming server ("connect") and listen to music.

gn.sn42 · Post by **gn.sn42** » 03 Nov 2009, 03:21

vasanthakokilam wrote:This is just to illustrate how crazy these laws can get and the nuances involved.

The law in this and in many other areas set out broad principles that are well understood, and in grey areas involving the boundaries of the law, courts interpret the situation and deliver a judgement. The fact that there are nuances and complications does not make these or other laws crazy. (I'm not saying all laws are right or just, and it is appropriate to try - through the legislative or political process - to change those laws. However, simply ignoring the law is usually not the best approach.)

I am too not a lawyer on this forum. However, the cases you outline are reasonably straightforward.

Assuming all these instances involve no permission or royalties,

1 and 3 are clearly not violations of copyright.

2, 4, 5 and 6 will depend on the context. If it's primarily private, it's not a violation; if it's offered to the public, it is.

7 is clearly a violation of copyright (unless you have strong authentication and only offer it to a very small group, and can show that this is the case).

None of these cases involve the fair use defence.

It's important to understand that "fair use" is a defence - that is, you admit to violating copyright, but claim that this violation is justifiable. In contrast, you could claim for example that a) no copyright exists; b) the suing party is not the legitimate copyright owner; c) no copyright violation occured (that is, the context was a private use); and so on.

The system has worked out the basic principles quite thoroughly; every once in a while we'll come across some novelties (like the internet) but these get resolved quite quickly and reasonably. You could say the entire court system is designed to provide clarity to complex and confusing points of law, so this is nothing unusual.

If you think that these cases are complex, just imagine that the music involved is the soundtrack of the latest Disney movie. Which of these activities would you engage in if you did not want a lawsuit?

I'm simply saying that Carnatic music composers and performers should have the same rights and respect that everyone else in music gets. And members of this forum, being rasikas, should - I thought - be sympathetic to the idea that these creative musicians should have rights.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 03 Nov 2009, 03:56

gn.sn42: Thanks. You have added value by making the public/private distinction. You make a good point on the nuances of item 7. I did not realize that. I thought it will be a violation no matter what.

BTW, on the preachy tone you took, I think you misunderstood my stand or intent of what I wanted to convey. I did not make it clear either. Crazy or otherwise, I agree with you, it is not an excuse to violate the laws or ignore it.

One side bar question, in the case of 2,4, 5, 6 and 7 who is actually violating the copy right. The one who actually copies or the one who makes it available publicly or both?

On the philosophical side, yes, I would like to see major changes made to these things. I sort of know the history of the copyright laws ( not much to do with protecting the creator's interests ). And that is why the 'producer' whose contribution need not be artistic is afforded more protection than the musician. What gets me is, the propagandists, to protect their self interest, spin this as a tool of innovation when in many cases it does the opposite. In my personal view, copyrights that protect the intermediaries are anti-innovation and anti-progress. So, if at all there is any major game changing benefits of the internet, it is NOT the ease of sharing copyrighted music, but it is the getting rid of unnecessary intermediaries and moving more towards a P to P model. That is already starting to happen with a few prominent artists. They openly defy their labels and opine openly 'I do not care how my fans get to hear the music, I care that they get to hear it. I will make my money touring'.

In any case, with reference to the topic of this thread, I agree that it is not a grey area.

gn.sn42 · Post by **gn.sn42** » 03 Nov 2009, 04:25

vasanthakokilam wrote:the preachy tone you took

Sorry! I sometimes get carried away, and this is a bit of a sore issue for me.

Re your questions, (again, I'm no expert but just play one on the internet) these cases involve "public performance" and as such the person playing the music should be liable. Again, individual cases may have complications that factor in.

I have strong thoughts on copyright myself, and am sympathetic to the kinds of things you say; which is one reason I like the efforts of Creative Commons - they provide a variety of ways to make more content available to the public while respecting the rights of creators; all within whatever legal framework is available to us.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 04 Nov 2009, 07:00

Understood. Thanks gn. The Creative Commons is interesting. When I posted a ring tone I made in a different forum, I think someone there suggested the same thing.