Internet Radio Lives Sort of.... As previously discussed, a new royalty rate scheme lobbied for by the RIAA could have put small and mid-size webcasters out of business. Congress saw significant public pressure to try and pass a bill killing the new scheme -- an effort the music industry insisted was a "money grab by big corporations." The music industry today extended an olive branch with a new proposal that they say should give relief to smaller webcasters. Some feedback on whether the proposal is any good over at RAIN (Radio & Internet Newsletter) -- who say the offer "addresses only a tiny portion of the big picture."
|
  KylemaulLovin' My FirefoxPremium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL |  The music industry is against itself?
...an effort the music industry insisted was a "money grab by big corporations."
So they're trying to make themselves out to be not so bad after all?
LOL I don't buy it for a second.
--
'The tighter the RIAA squeezes their grip, the more stars and systems will slip through their fingers.'
Member of the Official AnarchistTelecommunications(&)Terrorists bashing club. | |
|  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
4 edits |  Deal will make scofflaws pay up however
»www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stori···3&EDATE=
Of particular concern to SoundExchange and the thousands of artists and labels it represents is the lack of compliance by most small webcasters, including many that have complained the loudest about the CRB decision. Indeed, in their letter Representatives Berman and Coble noted that, "In return for compelling sound recording copyright owners to make their works available, the qualifying services agree to meet the terms and conditions of the compulsory license, which, inter alia, requires the periodic filing of statements of account and the timely payment of statutory royalties to the copyright owners whose works they have elected to perform."
In order for the process to work, small webcasters need to register with the copyright office, comply with all reporting requirements to SoundExchange and not avoid paying royalties that are lawfully owed. "The artists and labels are acting in good faith today, giving small webcasters a break. In return they expect the integrity of their music and their copyrights to be respected. That includes proper tracking and reporting of how their music is used, and that they are properly compensated," said Simson. So, the biggest whiners will now get the lower rates, but will now have to pay instead of ignoring their duty to fork over a percentage.
Sounds fair to me.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|  | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
1 edit | Re: Deal will make scofflaws pay up however Most of those "scofflaws" (nice bias there, Tom) are already registered and are paying royalties to both the composers and the performers via Shoutcast, Live365, 1.fm and other consolidators and relays. Only the puniest hobby sites running off their own servers have "avoided paying". Those generally have zero revenues so there is no actual loss to anyone.
Also, this new "offer" (10%-13%) is still 50% higher than what satellite radio operators pay (7.5%), and they are an order of magnitude bigger than even the biggest net broadcaster, revenue-wise. Why do you support that discrepancy?
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | |  pokesphIt Is Almost FastPremium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | Re: Deal will make scofflaws pay up however said by RadioDoc:Most of those "scofflaws" (nice bias there, Tom) are already registered and are paying royalties to both the composers and the performers via Shoutcast, Live365, 1.fm and other consolidators and relays. Only the puniest hobby sites running off their own servers have "avoided paying". Those generally have zero revenues so there is no actual loss to anyone. Also, this new "offer" (10%-13%) is still 50% higher than what satellite radio operators pay (7.5%), and they are an order of magnitude bigger than even the biggest net broadcaster, revenue-wise. Why do you support that discrepancy? So as a small-time, non-commercial (read hobby) broadcaster with no income derived from the broadcasts, will we have to pay anything?
10% of 0 = 0 (last time I checked anyway)
How would this affect us when we play foreign artists? Unlicensed music? Our own recordings?
Also why does sat radio get such a good deal? They CHARGE for their service.. most inet broadcasters do not.
--
Webmaster - Steve
- - - - - - - - - - - -
»ppnhosting.com
»www.1-gb.net
»pokemonpalace.net | |
| | | |  Doctor FourMy other vehicle is a TARDISPremium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | Re: Deal will make scofflaws pay up however IMO, the only thing the RIAA ought to have a legal right
to charge for is their own affiliates' music. Anything
else is pure greed and independent webcasters should fight
them tooth and nail over it (that is, if they have the
money to stand up to the RIAA's lawyers).
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
We are the Hacker Collective: Resistance Is Futile - All Your AACS Keys Will Be Assimilated. | |
| | | | RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | They want you to pay $500 a year, minimum, regardless of any income. You have to account for every song played to every slot every minute. If you can prove that you played no SoundExchange-covered music then you are off the hook. However, if you played one covered work to just one listener (including yourself) any time during the year, you just put yourself on the hook for that $500.
Satellite radio hired better whores, I guess.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
| | | | | | Because common sense seems to have disappeared from the American psyche since the 50's. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | good thing the station i listen to is immune to rapidly changing US laws. its out of london and i dont know if it pays anything due to how it works.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
 NEP1611
join:2002-03-27
Northford, CT | Better than nothing This to me is what Congress does best. Very rarely does Congress enact legislation, and I would suspect that the government would rather not involve itself in what is a relatively mundane issue. However, this Congress used its bully club to hasten some kind of solution that while for a "limited time" does nonetheless provide real relief for an extended period, while working toward a more permanent solution.
This happens every day, in every industry. No sense running around like the sky is falling, because it clearly was not. | |
|  mazhurgPremium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB | Out of the box thinking.... Bah,
The RIAA and ilk should *pay* the stations to play the music.
The bottom line, if no one played the stuff, then no one would buy it, right?  | |
| | | | Re: Out of the box thinking.... I agree that they should have to pay a % of there revenues to the RIAA. They are making money on other peoples work
I am against the 2 cents or whatever it was per song played. a fixed percentage makes more sense. It allows the smaller companies survive. Consider it a form of tax | |
| | |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Out of the box thinking.... said by Pete_64:I agree that they should have to pay a % of there revenues to the RIAA. They are making money on other peoples work Depends: is it a "break even" or a "for profit" affair. If it's "break even" or less (i.e., they charge, but it's enough to pay operational costs or less), 2% of revenue still radically alters the ability to continue to function.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. | |
|
| | | Actually the record labels DO pay radio stations to play music. It's called payola and it's illegal, but it is being done all the time. Lots of times it's not actually cash they "pay" with, but a bribe is a bribe. | |
|
| | ... Internet Radio ... Never was, never will be more than a novelty.
Ditto for IPTV, inspite of under informed BBR wackos opinions.
Pay attention kiddies, IPTV is NEVER GOING TO BE MORE THAN IP-RADIO has been. | |
| |  elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: ... Internet Radio ... said by AnonReality :
Never was, never will be more than a novelty.
Ditto for IPTV, inspite of under informed BBR wackos opinions.
Pay attention kiddies, IPTV is NEVER GOING TO BE MORE THAN IP-RADIO has been.
for some of us its the ONLY way to listen to new stuff
until XM or Sirius carry a J-pop and anime music channel
Japan A radio and smaller station are the only way | |
| | |  BonezXBasement DwellerPremium
join:2004-04-13
Canada | Re: ... Internet Radio ... said by elios:said by AnonReality :
Never was, never will be more than a novelty.
Ditto for IPTV, inspite of under informed BBR wackos opinions.
Pay attention kiddies, IPTV is NEVER GOING TO BE MORE THAN IP-RADIO has been.
for some of us its the ONLY way to listen to new stuff until XM or Sirius carry a J-pop and anime music channel Japan A radio and smaller station are the only way agreed, most radio "stations" and "providers" will only play what they think they can make the most money off of, usually without catering to niche markets or other "smaller" groups that would none the less still generate revenue. | |
|
 ARGONAUTgot ping?Premium
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN | Why not? Why not online stations work together, form their own label and promote new groups cutting out riaa mafia? | |
| | | RIAA running scared They have gotten more of a negative reaction them they expected.This is just s temp fix until 2010 that gives the RIAA and their shills time to bribe and scheme before the 2010 elections.
--
Get Verizon FIOS,The Anti-DIOS | |
| | | | Re: RIAA running scared Plus, I doubt they will lose anything anyway. Remember, this latest change to the internet radio rates that everyone is having issues with is RETROACTIVE!! Its retroactive to begining of 2006, so the radio stations will owe 1 years worth right off the bad.
All they will do is when 2010 rolls around, they will make it retroactive to now, and suddenly all the internet radio stations will owe massive amounts of money. So basically RIAA puts off a few bucks now in return for total annihilation in a few years. Pretty good deal for them.
Minimum charge if congress doesn't stop the latest change is $500 per channel per year, and the planned increases only go up from there. There's also a per song charge:
"2007's rate is a 37.5% increase over 2006; 2008 and 2009's annual increases are about 28% per year"
Keep in mind that broadcast radio does NOT PAY ANY ROYALTIES TO ARTISTS!!
I'm sure the RIAA loves it like that. If you are signed up with RIAA, you have to have a million seller album before you can break even because of all the fees and charges the labels take away from artists. | |
|
 meskinctMad Scientist at WorkPremium
join:2002-01-07
Danbury, CT
 ·Comcast
2 edits | A Good Read by Trent Reznor from NIN I found this interview of Trent Reznor and his take on the whole industry. Interesting to see an artist's point of view.
»www.metalexpressradio.com/menu.p···&id=3406
NINE INCH NAILS Frontman Says His Record Company Is Run By 'Thieves'
Q: Where does that extra $10 on your album go?
Trent: That money's not going into my pocket, I can promise you that. It's just these guys who have f---ed themselves out of a job essentially, that now take it out on ripping off the public. I've got a battle where I'm trying to put out quality material that matters and I've got fans that feel it's their right to steal it and I've got a company that's so bureaucratic and clumsy and ignorant and behind the times they don't know what to do, so they rip the people off.
--
Rich. My Website - ThisIsPico.Com including the AT&T/SBC Northeast/SNET Status Page and Graphs | |
| | | | Re: A Good Read by Trent Reznor from NIN Reminds me of the speech (circa 2000) where Courtney Love slams the record labels, Napster, and others.
What I find particularly amusing is the fact that SoundExchange is demanding a percentage of gross revenue, not gross profit. However, the music industry -- like the movie industry -- uses all sorts of creative bookkeeping techniques in order to minimize royalties paid to artists. So, it basically want gross revenue paid to them, but are only willing to shell out the chump change to the artists after their accountants find every way under the sun to whittle down the dollar figure. Hypocritical bloodsuckers! | |
|
| | This is why I've not bought a riaa label record in going on 6 years. They make it too easy for me, first by telling me who is RIAA, and by trying to kill my di.fm!
--
Retaking our country one election at a time. | |
|
| |
|
|
