RIAA Says Webcasting Royalties Are Too Low

Karl writes "The RIAA announced today their intention to appeal the royalty rates for internet radio decided on by the Librarian of Congress. Today was the very last day to file for an appeal." The webcasters put out of business by the royalties include SomaFM, Monkeyradio, KPIG, and many others. At least a few Congressional representatives support revising CARP to give small webcasters a chance to survive.

Comments

Re:Bah!

[uncoveror]

The RIAA has nearly ended webcasting, which was a form of promotion that cost them nothing, and now want a royalty scheme that would end it entirely. Enough! Boycott the recording industy. Don't buy CDs.

Re:I announce that CD prices are TOO HIGH

[funky womble]

If you want to buy used cds from stores they cost just as much as it would new.

True (most of the time), though if you're doing it as a protest, that doesn't really matter: the point is that the money goes to someone other than the RIAA labels.

If you're helping to support a small independent music store, which might otherwise not be able to afford to stay in business, all the better.

I somehow find this quote appropriate here...

[Jugalator]

"Only the continuous and steady application of the methods for suppressing a doctrine, etc., makes it possible for a plan to succeed."
-- Adolf Hitler

Re:Clearly the rates..

[eXtro]

The RIAA's business plan is:

1. Profit
   
2. Buy legislation
   
3. Get bad press with a minority
   
4. Characterize minority as criminals
   
5. Higher profits
   

Seriously, most people don't even know what internet radio is. If the RIAA says that internet radio is piracy most of the public will just nod their heads and say "Go get 'em!".

HOTT troll! Except...

[dave-fu]

...if you're a webcaster, if you don't play a single bit of music, under the new "agreement", you still owe the RIAA $500. If you play nothing but independent labels not affiliated with the RIAA or foreign labels (also not covered)? Still owe them $500.
They get more money from webcasters who play their property, but they also get money from webcasters who don't. How does that make sense?

RIAA needs a reality check

[Lxy]

I work for a small radio station here in the US. We had a few listeners in Germany that liked us. They'd e-mail us all the time and request stuff, it was pretty cool.

Then the mighty hand of the RIAA took away our webcasting. We couldn't afford their rediculous fees and the audio server is now someone's workstation.

Here's what I don't get. By playing the music we play, we encourage those listeners to go out and buy CDs. Apparently the RIAA doesn't understand that. Somehow, allowing people to hear a SAMPLE of music the RIAA produces, encouraging people to buy a full album, is considered piracy to them. Do they realize how much of their sales are based off of listeners who heard it on the radio first? Eventually the RIAA will probably sue radio stations out of existence for this "piracy" that they've only tolerated thus far.

I particularly liked This post yesterday. Substitute in your favorite *AA. I think this is the future of RIAA owned music as well.