Webcasters and Record Industry Both Appeal Royalty Ruling

jonesvery writes: "Both Webcasters and record companies are appealing the proposed royalty structure suggested by an arbitration panel, according to this LA Times story. It should surprise no one that the Webcasters feel that the proposed royalties are absurdly high, while the record companies wants them to be higher -- at levels set in independent deals negotiated between the RIAA and a couple of dozen companies. The fact that many of the companies that made these independent deals with the RIAA couldn't make enough money to both pay the royalties and stay in business doesn't seem to worry the record companies much. Funny, that..." We did an earlier story about the royalty ruling. The internet radio community seems to be just a bit upset about the whole thing.

Comments

Remember, the difference between CARP and CRAP is

[Scoria]

the letter A's placement.

I'm going to reiterate a post I made to another Slashdot "royalty" thread a few weeks ago.

The proposed royalty tree is ludicrous. After all, they're proposing that I pay *them* to give *their* "artists" free publicity. Considering I generate no revenue from the project I'm about to discuss, this is unacceptable!

I'm currently developing a web application called "laconica," which is slated for release in early 2003. Basically, the software permits the users to manipulate the playlist by vote. You could even add music to it. However, such a webcast would be almost impossible to operate legally. First, you would purchase the requisite $500 *license* to be a non-profit channel.

Now, as a non-profit broadcaster, you'd pay $0.05 per every song played. Oh, wait, but laconica is configured with six "genre channels" by default. So, per the CARP, you'd pay $0.14. Although such a small amount of money may appear affordable to casual observers, basic mathematics teaches us that it'd cost $67.20 (assuming that all songs are three minutes in duration and this is a twenty-four hour broadcast) per day to broadcast. That's $2,083.20 per month. But don't worry, I'm certain that the RIAA will have their own manipulative, uninteractive webcasts (laden with ads) for all of us to listen to, designed solely to boost revenues. On one hand, they're ingenious. The RIAA eliminates any chance of an innovative competitor by legislating a monetary defense.