Slashdot Mirror
Senate Committee Holds Webcasting Hearing
jonathanjo writes "Yesterday (5/15/02) the US Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled: "Copyright Royalties: Where is the Right Spot On The Dial For Webcasting." This was a review of the work of CARP, the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, the group formed by the DMCA that has closed down webstreaming for many independent radio stations with new high fees and exhaustive reporting requirements. Representatives from RIAA, Digital Media Association, Arbitron, Real Networks, and Yahoo gave testimony, as well as people representing two independent Vermont webcasters, and the American Federation Of Television and Radio Artists. Senator Patrick Leahy's (D-VT) testimony was surprisingly sympathetic to small webcasters (especially by inviting two from his state to speak). Orrin Hatch gave the expected pro-DMCA boilerplate."
The Librarian of Congress can do three things. He could approve the decision, which nobody seems to like.
You know, I'm glad someone said it...
The best thing the Librarian of Congress could do would be to reject the proprosal, and then deal with the inevitable appeals in Federal Court from the RIAA. Let's all keep our fingers crossed. (when they aren't busy dialing our Congressmen!)
KCRW, an LA NPR station, has been playing PSAs about this. They have a great page with a sample letter to your Congresscritter. And be sure to check out SaveInternetRadio.org. This is something the average non-slashdot-reader can understand far more than they can or will bother to comprehend DMCA, SSSCA, or the Russian who wrote software that let people read books, so there is a slight chance that the forces of ignorance won't take this round.
This is a direct result of poltical pressure from small webcasters, and shows that the system does respond to such pressure.
Last Thursday, before the Roundtable at the Library of Congress on the CARP recordkeeping rules, there was a "Hill Walk" organized by Kevin Shively of Beethoven.com and other small webcasters, who went to the Capitol and meet with legislators and their staffers to explain their position. Earlier, on May 1, the same group organized the "day of silence" on Internet radio, to show the result if the situation wasn't changed. This hearing was one result from this politcal campaign.
More information about this grass-roots effort can be found at SaveInternetRadio.com, and some of the best coverage is in the Radio and Internet Newsletter.
http://www.rice.edu/cb/sos/ -- Information pertaining to the effect of the CARP recomendations upon non-commerical radio stations.
http://www.kurthanson.com/ -- RAIN is a trade publication for the Internet Radio industry. This is an excellent site to keep tabs on how the campaign is going to stop these fees and reporting requirements.
http://broadcastpromotions.net/carp/ -- This site allows you to send faxes through their web site and directly to the person in Washington that you should be bugging.
The CARP proposal, if passed, will take effect on or about May 21, 2002.
- what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
I don't know who to like in Congress anymore. When it comes to the music and entertainment industries it seems that both the Republicans and the Democrats have had their palms equally greased by the lobbyists. The corruption and lobbying virtually extinguishes the will of the people. With the entertainment industry in one corner it becomes even worse. They have the power to influence what the masses see in the media and can sway their opinions.
People exchanging music suddenly became hardened criminals sitting in the darkness behind a computer screen plotting the overthrow of the capitalist recording companies. The way these revolutionaries are potrayed I'm not sure what I'd do if I ever met one in a dark alley. Would I run? Would I be afraid of this dark nemesis of intellectual property rights? Are they the spawn of evil that the RIAA and MPAA has made people out to be? What about all the flagrant copyright violators who buy VCRs and tape programs for their personal archive of movies and shows they like? Do these people walk the dark path of corruption? How can we return these souls to the light?
Case in point: I was listening to Opie and Anthony a few days ago and they had some joker from Metallica on. Normally I would change the channel since the group sucks and I have boycotted them anyway, but I found it intriguing what he was saying. He actually said it was sharing to send out tapes to 2000 of your friends.. that's fine. If you put it on the Internet however that is "stealing" (in his words). Where is the point of no return? I can give away your music for free as long as I get to know the people? How about if I'm swapping mp3 collections with friends from IRC? Is that fine? Where does the line get drawn? These luddites will eventually get old and die away, but hopefully they won't have a chance to corrupt musicians from the next generation who must understand they need to embrace technology and not shun it to succeed.
Perhaps its time for a new industry association to pick up the reigns the RIAA dropped? How about a new entity that's tech friendly who could sign new artists (its not impossible)? I'm sure most musicians wouldn't mind having new revenue streams to tap, its just more money in their pockets. All I'm saying is I wouldn't mind seeing someone defending the artists that had a clue and wasn't refusing to face the tides of change. By properly paying the artists the money they are due, and selling CDs at a decent price, online distribution could more than easily make up the slack of the lower prices/reduced profits that the RIAA has in place now. Online distribution/radio HAS to be cheaper than retail channels. Common sense says so. All that would really be needed is to sign the new acts the RIAA would like and slowly convert the currently popular ones. Who in their right mind would stay with the RIAA backed companies if they can see the greener side of the fence? (pun intended)
"On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
To really understand this, and to hear for yourself the difference between a great station and the canned corporate crap we get on most FM stations now, check out KPIG. They play such a variety of music, and the manager requires them to play NOTHING that is top 40. KPIG is at http://www.kpig.com.
I always like to point out that you can actually help do something about this. Contact your Senator and Member of Congress. IT WORKS. The more they hear from people onm an issue the more seriously they take it. Go here: http://capwiz.com/nyt/dbq/officials/. Type in your zip code to see who to contact. It makes a difference. Try it.
It's interesting that "they" are listening. Why?
This doesn't necessarily mean that the politicians personally care about this issue. It is more likely to mean that we are seeing the birth of politics on the Internet. The independents are gaining a voice because they are more effectively rallying support for thier cause than the traditional lobbiests.
I'm happy about this.
What I'm not happy about is that once this process is understood by the majors, the same folks we dislike because they shut us out of pollitical processes today will be the ones controlling the debate on the Internet.
Be aware of this.
If you decide to put on a play covered by a publisher like Samuel French or Dramatists Play Service, your royalties will vary depending on whether your group is professional or amateur. Usually the amateur rate is fixed and fairly nominal -- $50 per performance is what I'm remembering -- and the professional rate most likely depends on the size of the theater and the intended run of the play. (You have to get a rate quote from the publisher for professional performances, something I've never done.)
So, why not base Internet royalties on the size of the audience, or perhaps the number of simultaneous streams a broadcaster can handle?
This would allow the larger broadcasters to pay the larger royalties and hopefully allow the hobbyists to pursue their hobby without it bankrupting them.
Surely the RIAA must realize that they can make more money from small payments from a lot of source than from big payments from two or three sources. Unless this is all about power, which is entirely possible, in which case nothing short of shutting down everyone who isn't buddy-buddy with them will make them happy.
Someone you trust is one of us.