RIAA Wants Artist Royalties Lowered

laughingcoyote writes "The RIAA has asked the panel of federal government Copyright Royalty Judges to lower royalties paid to publishers and songwriters. They're specifically after digital recordings, and uses like cell phone ringtones. They say that the rates (which were placed in 1981) don't apply the same way to new technologies." From the article: "According to The Hollywood Reporter, the RIAA maintains that in the modern period when piracy began devastating the record industry profits to publishers from sales of ringtones and other 'innovative services' grew dramatically. Record industry executives believe this to be cause to advocate reducing the royalties paid to the artists who wrote the original music."

Comments

Re:RIAA does *not* represent artists

[Anonymous Coward]

The Recording Industry Association of America represents the recording industry, like record labels and distributors, not artists.

It's easy to get confused simply because they lie about it so much. "Won't somebody think of the starving artists!" is their main battle cry, not "Won't somebody think of the fat record company executives". However, it's also easy to avoid confusion by simply reminding yourself that they are lying weasels with the ethical standards of a rat. Never take anything they say at face value and you won't get misled (as often).

Eh...?

[Anonymous Coward]

the RIAA maintains that in the modern period when piracy began devastating the record industry profits to publishers from sales of ringtones and other 'innovative services' grew dramatically.

Is it just me or does this sentence make no fucking sense?

This could be a good thing

[Heir Of The Mess]

If the RIAA start driving away the artists then it makes the RIAA even less of a player. Just think one day the artists and the fans might connect directly on the internet with no middle man in between to screw the artists and sue the fans.

Their greed will be their undoing. I wonder why it hasn't been their undoing in the past though?

Re:This could be a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I have often wondered why the recording industry, faced with increasing competition from other distribution technologies, has not concluded that "recording" no longer is a viable business today.
They should go out of business or enter into new ventures, instead of bitching all the time.

I bet the association of Watt steam-enging manufacturers also experiences difficult times these days. But they don't try to blame the Otto internal combustion engine people all the time.

Re:one would hope...

[joshetc]

I would think it would be the exact opposite. In the last 25 years the cost of audio production equipment, cd presses (well equivelant to mainstream of yester-year) and printing presses (for inserts) have advanced dramatically and gone wait down in price. I think its about time artists begin recording their own music or grouping together for recordings then paying the labels a small cut for mass reproduction of their music...

Re:Why artists?

[Fred_A]

Not all musicians are artists.

"Artist" is "industryspeak" to designate a content creator. It's different than the popular meaning of the word. Whether the output has any artistic value or not is irrelevant. It's faster than saying for example "the guy who moves his lips on the video while the ugly fattie we can't show sings on the sound track".

"Music is art"

[UnixSphere]

Sure it is, the way they pump out artists with modifications to their vocals and all the industry music magic they use. That's not art, that's a product being produced just the same way a Ford Mustang is produced on an assembly line.