Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Seeks Royalties From Radio

SierraPete writes "First it was Napster; then it was Internet radio; then it was little girls, grandmothers, and dead people. But now our friends at the RIAA are going decidedly low-tech. The LA Times reports that the RIAA wants royalties from radio stations. 70 years ago Congress exempted radio stations from paying royalties to performers and labels because radio helps sell music. But since the labels that make up the RIAA are not getting the cash they desire through sales of CDs, and since Internet and satellite broadcasters are forced to cough up cash to their racket, now the RIAA wants terrestrial radio to pay up as well."

12 of 555 comments (clear)

  1. From the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Mary Wilson, who with Diana Ross and Florence Ballard formed the original Supremes, said the exemption was unfair and forced older musicians to continue touring to pay their bills."

    Yeah because they should be allowed to sit around all day earning money just because they are so great.

    1. Re:From the article... by 605dave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's funny, because the radio station owners are sitting around making money because of how great she was...

      --
      Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    2. Re:From the article... by honkycat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right, it's not like they're continuing to provide a service, pay their power bills, employ staff to keep the transmitters working, etc. They're just collecting a paycheck by trampling on her rights. Those millions she already made were not nearly enough compensation for those few hours of music she put on records. Why should she have to continue to be productive to put food on the table? Why can't she just sit and reap the rewards of her creativity the same way the rest of us do?

      Oh... wait...

    3. Re:From the article... by *weasel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it's totally unfair that the guy who bought the house I built sold it for a profit a few years later.
      I mean, I should totally get a cut of absolutely any profit derived from my work at any point in the future!

      Otherwise I'd have to plan for retirement or continue building houses.
      And that doesn't sound fair. Not while people are out there profitting off my work.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
  2. Sounds fair to me by grimJester · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From TFA:

    Mary Wilson, who with Diana Ross and Florence Ballard formed the original Supremes, said the exemption was unfair and forced older musicians to continue touring to pay their bills.

    Yes, it's unfair that people are forced to work to pay their bills. There should be free money for all with no incentive to work. In a perfect world, congress should force everyone to pay record companies money, so record companies could distribute the wealth in whatever way they see fit.

  3. Re:Excellent! by montyzooooma · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "2) RIAA bribes the right people and that law gets reversed, which then costs our country its music-playing radio stations and the music industry loses the majority of its sales."

    As somebody already pointed out the rest of the world gets by paying a fee for radio play. What this WILL mean is that you'll end up with the bland "selection" of national radio that other Western countries have. I was always surprised at how diverse the US music industry was but I didn't realise your radio stations got a free ride. Now it makes sense and I'm sure this would mean less exposure for niche artistes. Gotta love an industry that's trying to hammer nails in its own coffin.

  4. Silly RIAA... by beerdini · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are attacking their own advertisers now. Most people purchase music after hearing it, which they usually hear it on the radio. Lets fast forward 5 years pretending this is successful. Radio stations are now put out of business because of lawsuits or refusal to pay the RIAA's ransom so as CD sales continue to fall; that will leave the RIAA scratching their heads wondering why, when they just killed their most wide spread advertising tool.

    Whats next? Suing stores that play music inside for shoppers?

  5. Re:Give them what they want! by mibalzonya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It may also mean less music. Instead of the same 8 songs. We will now have the same six songs.

  6. is this about money? by hackstraw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the summary: But since the labels that make up the RIAA are not getting the cash they desire through sales of CDs, and since Internet and satellite broadcasters are forced to cough up cash to their racket.

    I mean seriously. Are these people hungry? Are they homeless? Are they unable to pay their bills? Is their mansion really too small?

    I ran into a former owner of a CD store in a college town a few years ago, and she said that she had to close down because CDs were not selling, so she sold the business, and started another one. She said explicitly that downloads hurt her bottom line, but oh well, times change, and she had to change with the times.

    I mean, how many steam engine engineers are trying to sue these new fangled gasoline, oil, diesel, electric, fuel cell, etc engineers? Or their customers, or their kids, or dead people?

    To me, this is some kind of psychological or socioligical problem that is not properly addressed as such, and the bottom line is that _everybody_ is losing because of it. The real problem is that the government is an accessory to their psychological/sociological problems, because I guess they have the same issues.

    Why isn't the government or anybody concerned about real issues like national debt, health care (oxymoron) reform, energy costs, housing costs, and the stuff that actually affects real people that are real problems. I mean, if nobody bought a 1970s technology like a CD is ever again, would it really be a big deal?

    Is this kind of sociopathy just "normal" when a society is collapsing on itself? Does anybody know what the real issues are here? This is a control/powertrip thing that makes no sense.

  7. Re:Give them what they want! by hal2814 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You get 8 songs?! I just get DJs who think they're a lot more amusing than they really are and commercials. I'd love to have a radio station that actually played music.

  8. Re:Absolutely! Strong support! by walt-sjc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh this has nothing to do with music sales and traditional broadcast radio. This is still about internet "radio".

    Internet "radio" is going back to congress asking to be treated like a real radio station and get back to a zero royalty rate. The RIAA wants to head this off and say that real radio needs to pay too. It won't work, but they are going to give it a go...

  9. Proof that musicians are deluded by seanonymous · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Mary Wilson, who with Diana Ross and Florence Ballard formed the original Supremes, said the exemption was unfair and forced older musicians to continue touring to pay their bills."

    Oh no! You mean those poor musicians have to keep working, just like the rest of us!? What is this world coming to!?

    Does an older assembly line worker at Ford continue to get paid every time someone drives a classic Mustang? Does an Amish quilt maker get a nickel every time someone gets cold and covers up? Of course not! Then what makes musicians so special?

    Idiots. Get back to work!