The New York Times article lays out the case, and asks three important questions, central to artists of the 21st century and our understanding of art today: "What is art? At what point does artistic freedom end and copyright infringement begin? And will enforcing copyright restrictions deprive artists of their First Amendment rights?" Contemporary artists like Jeff Koons and Damien Hirst are constantly pushing the boundaries.  In their defense lawyers argue that these artists take the everyday, the mass culture and the mundane, and elevate it to a new meaning.  By blowing the original up, or encasing it, the artist gives imparts a new found symbolism on the artistic work.  However, artists like Jeff Koons are increasingly testing those boundaries.  This is where fair use comes into play.  When is something not quite transformative enough?  When is the original work lost, and when this happens this is unjust to the original artist.  This article brings up these issues and gets us asking where the boundaries lie and how to decide when they are crossed.  It is a problem in the art world that is encapsulated in the controversy of Koons' work but reaches far beyond it. 

     John Simson defended the new royalty rulings made by the Copyright Royalty Board in his testimony on "Music and Radio in the 21st Century: Assuring Fair Rates and Rules Across Platforms.” Simson is a former performer, artist manager, music attorney, and presently an executive director of SoundExchange. SoundExchange is the single receiving agent of royalties paid by webcasters. He supports the increasing rates on the basic principle that "the people who create music must be paid." He defends SoundExchange's concern over the business of webcasters but argues that revenues are predicted to increase over the future. SoundExchange currently represents about 31,000 artists and 3,500 labels. Simson emphasizes the hard work put into music creation, and he scorns at those who believe music should be free or those who devalue it. Simson argues that webcasters are contradicting the decisions by the Copyright Royalty Board solely based on their prospective financial gains. He strongly believes that the new rates are fair and that no further negotiations are required.
     Simson’s testimony is important to my paper because it explains the royalty decision from the opposing point of view. Simson directly works for the company receiving the royalties, and so he represents SoundExchange’s opinions. Although Simson argues that fair rates must be ensured for the sake of the musicians, SoundExchange is also benefitting from the increasing rates. This testimony is important to my paper in order to prove that SoundExchange is biased in its strong royalty support.