Slashdot Mirror
Web Radio and the RIAA
Andrew Leonard writes: "Steve Marks, VP of legal affairs of the RIAA, is duking it out with critics in a point-counterpoint debate focusing on the nitty-gritty details of how artists will be compensated by the new rules on Webcasting royalties."
Should be the same as before, right? Artist puts down $1 million for WebPlay rights, gets played on the Web, and recoups it at .01c per album. That's the industry formula for protecting artists, if I recall correctly.
Visit saveinternetradio.org, a site by the folks behind the Radio And Internet Newsletter, or RAIN. We in the radio broadcast industry are doing everything we can to make it clear that the CARP recommendations, based almost line-by-line on what the RIAA asked for, would effectively eliminate radio broadcasters from the internet streaming arena. Oddly enough, RIAA member companies are in the process of rolling out their own for-pay services... coincidence, right?
I'm only wearing black until they come out with something darker.
These problems with the RIAA and internet radio are nothing new. Slashdot had a story on October 5 about how the recording industry is trying to collect royalties from webcasters who are streaming audio.
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/04/03/web_r adio_redux/print.html
I like this last bit:
As for SoundExchange's inability to update its Web site due to not having an on-staff webmaster, please take a look at this 10-minute guide to HTML. I'm sure some of the talented folks at SoundExchange could pick up the skills needed to update the text of your Web site within a couple of days, and it would have saved many hours of many people's time (and prevented much confusion) if there hadn't been a number of folks pointing to the SoundExchange site as proof that (for instance) SoundExchange will not be paying the artists directly.
It is always good to encourage techical literacy.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Yes and no.
Yes, stations pay something called "performance royalties". These royalties are administered by "performing rights organizations" (BMI, ASCAP, SECAM) and are disbursed via a complex schedule that takes into account the medium of distribution (e.g., radio, TV, jukebox) and the number of times a work is played.
No, these royalties do not go to the artist. They go to the songwriter. Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not.
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
But you can't count how many people are listening to your radio station. Sure, there are folks like Nielsen sampling usage patterns, but the data are inexact.
Now that the Powers That Wanna Be feel they can extract an exact headcount of listeners on the web, they figure that nailing down an exact per-listener fee model makes sense.
This is just another case where copious amounts of exact data drives people to bad decisionmaking.
jwz has written up a nice article that explains how the current licensing works and how the proposed CARP licensing would work here. There is no way Internet radio will be feasible if this goes in to effect, even without the added fees. Check out the information broadcasters would be required to report to the RIAA: there is no fewer than 18 pieces of information required for each song played! Not to mention the information that must be gathered from each listener. But just in case, the fees can be applied retroactively.
I hope that if this does go into effect, there is a large backlash. Remember that this is an election year. Votes still matter and politicians still care about getting them.
This was on Declan's list a few weeks ago but a House Subcommittee is seeking interested parties views on digital media and DMCA issues. This is the text of their letter. If you chose not to respond to their request and live in the US, then chose not to complain that Congress is not listening or only listening to $$, deadline for comment is April 8, so that gives you all close to a week:
March 11, 2002
To all parties interested in the application of copyright law to the digital environment:
The growth of the Internet has raised complex and controversial issues over the application of copyright law to the digital environment. Examination of these issues is increasingly important in light of growing digital music piracy, expanding public demand for online music services and the willingness and ability of many entities to meet that demand.
The Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property has held a series of oversight hearings on digital music issues, culminating in a December 2001 hearing on the
recommendations made by the U.S. Copyright Office in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Section 104 Report. Legislation (H.R. 2724) addressing online music issues has also been introduced in the House of Representatives.
Given the topical nature of this subject matter, we are initiating a process to review relevant digital music issues and related proposals to amend the Copyright Act that have been brought or will be brought to our attention.
All interested parties are encouraged to submit written views on the merits of relevant digital music issues and related proposed amendments to the Copyright Act. The Subcommittee deadline for receipt of comments is 5:00 p.m. on April 8, 2002. The merits of the proposals will be evaluated in light of the views received and input from other Members of the Subcommittee, with the goal of discerning whether consensus exists on meaningful solutions to address identifiable harms. Subsequently, at a date and time to be determined, we will schedule a general meeting with all interested parties to share our findings.
We thank you in advance for your participation in this process. We believe it will produce valuable discourse on these very important issues and hope it will result in meaningful solutions to some of the problems and controversies surrounding the application of copyright law to the digital environment.
Sincerely,
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR
JOHN CONYERS, JR.
HOWARD COBLE
HOWARD L. BERMAN
CHRIS CANNON
RICK BOUCHER
Uhh, that's interesting. Do you have any actual information on how and where to submit comments? Is there an online form or should comments be submitted via snail mail? Do you have an address for either?