Copyright Office Publishes Final Webcasting Rates

Ghaleon writes: "The Copyright Office just released the final rates for webcasting. Looks like the rates are lower than the CARP recomendations, though I'm no webcaster so I'm not sure if these rates are good or not ..." nbrimhall points to a bit more at soma fm as well. Update: 06/20 21:54 GMT by M : See our last story for background information. The final rates are nothing to cheer about: most webcasters will not be able to afford them. Update: 06/21 03:13 GMT by T : An anonymous reader points out the continuing coverage at kurthanson.com, including reactions from Reps. Boucher and Inslee.

Comments

This is great news.

[EpochVII]

And heres why: only unsigned bands will be able to get on U.S. net radio stations. Seriously, fark the RIAA. The other good news is all the streams with copyrighted music will be overseas, either hosted there or run by foreigners, it doesnt really matter. Either way more people will be looking overseas to give the finger to the U.S.

This really does make me sad, though. Hopefully this will jumpstart artists to move to more independent labels.

Tag's Trance Trip off the air

[djneko]

Reposted from digitally imported's forums

I don't know how it will affect DI, but if anyone was listening to Tag's Trance Trip, he shut off just before 3pm Pacific Time.

He was in tears thanking everyone.

Last song on the air was "Days go by" by Dirty Vegas

The anarchy of the net can prevail though. As streams drop off the air (every shoutcast stream may be affected), we must trade the files via FTP and P2P networks if we are to stop the music cartels. Blank cds are cheap, hand out cds full of mp3s with information about what has been done to our beloved streams.

As the streams are shut off, open up the archives and distribute them. Show them how much worse it will get when they block off one avenue of our expression.

Our culture should not be locked away from us and sold back to us.
------------------

The ideas contained herein are free to republish by anyone not affiliated in any way shape or form with the RIAA and MPAA

Civil disobedience

[ryanwright]

It's time for civil disobedience.

It's time for someone to setup a streaming radio app that works similar to P2P. Something that can't be shut down.

This is total bullshit. Commercial stations don't pay $500 per day. Why should Somafm?

I know the guy running Soma watches Slashdot. What can we do to help, short of giving in and paying these mobsters? I'll do what I can for you, but I'm not sure what to do aside from continuing to sign online petitions and send letters. I sent one to my rep in congress on this subject. Received a worthless form letter in reply that refused to take a position on either side. The punk.

I have 1Mbps of upstream bandwidth. Maybe it's time to put my private 15GB MP3 collection up on the various P2P networks? So far, I don't let anyone but my family access it, but I'm thinking it's time to reconsider...

I know at least some of you bastards in the industry are reading this. Get a clue: The public won't stand for this greed. Swapping music on the Internet is only going to increase because of this. You people need to change your attitude, and fast - you can't prosecute us all.

Re:Civil disobedience

[Bobzibub]

hmmm.. I was thinking about this...
Suppose you set up a p2p system where each node streams 1/nth of a 'channel' or 'station'. n could be about 16 (16 'subchannels') which would bring down the load on each peer to 128/16 kbps, well within the means of every cable modem.

Peers could be easily written in Java and spend their time discovering other peers. Your XMMS/winamp/whatever client connects to your local java client which requests and assembles n 'subchannels' into a stream. Peers do not reveal *their* sources, only other peers. That way, the true source is obscured, but more importantly, more nodes are brought in.

Broadcasters stream to many nodes with a special arrangement/agreement. (push) Everything else is pull.

Your java client requests a channel/subchannel from some known server or requests a node where to get a channel/subchannel . They stream to you.

The underlying protocol would be based upon sending files, not a true music stream. These could be caputured by the local client if wanted. Information could describe overlap of two music files, messages, artist info, etc.

1) low bandwidth for nodes ==> many nodes.
2) dynamic hierarchy. Loose a node and the system will be able to adapt.
3) difficult to find the true source.
4) access to the files streamed.
5) Of course it would stream Ogg! ; )

What do you think?

Cheers,
-b

Re:Civil disobedience

[WEFUNK]

It's time for civil disobedience.

It's time for someone to setup a streaming radio app that works similar to P2P. Something that can't be shut down.

Not just another P2P app, but let's start seeing more P2P devices and infrastructure as well, like wireless multi-hop networks. That way even the physical network will be tough to regulate or shut down.

It might only work for densely populated local areas at first, but if you can get around the security issues this is the logical next step in the evolution of the internet.

The technology and the demand for streaming content is out there, if the RIAA and MPAA etc. kept shooting themselves in the foot, inventors and consumers will find another way to get what they want.

The RIAA's Response? Feed us more!!

[EchoMirage]

Even more disgusting, but certainly not suprising, is the RIAA's response to the announcement, saying, "[the rate] simply does not reflect the fair market value of the music as promised by the law."

Who's up for burning RIAA at the stake?

Re:What about non-RIAA music?

[Sloppy]

It doesn't really have anything to do with the RIAA directly. These are compulsory license terms and fees. What that means, is that these are figures that broadcasters get to forcefully impose upon copyright holders, and there is nothing the copyright holder can do about it. If he wants more money, or he doesn't want you to broadcast his music at all, you can tell him "tough shit" and do it anyway (legally), as long as you follow these rules.

Effectively, all that means is that it sets the upper bound.

Where RIAA comes in, is that they are big business and won't negotiate with you "little people", so these rates and terms aren't just the upper bound, but they're the lower bound also. This is the only offer on the table when you are broadcasting their stuff.

For non-RIAA music, such as that garage band that played at the bar last weekend and then had a few beers with you, they are probably very happy to negotiate with you and offer you other terms. So instead of you paying these rates, you'll be able to work out something better. Maybe they'll even let you play their stuff free, because they want people to hear it.

IMHO, it's pretty fair. The ball is in the musicians' court now. They need to either commit to working for the corporations (who can push them pretty hard and effectively when they want to (e.g. you have probably heard the name "Britney Spears")), or work for themselves (and offer pleasant terms to underground supporters who will push thme in a different way). Choose wisely, dudes.