A Commonsense Proposal On Net Radio Rates

quark235 tips us to an open letter to the RIAA, proposing a fairer royalty structure for Net radio, written by Paul A. Gathard. Gathard is president of Barnabus Road Media, a company that provides streaming radio services to commercial and non-commercial stations across the US. He contends that his proposed rate structure, if implemented, would actually result in higher total revenues to SoundExchange than their current proposal would, after it kills off 90% of Net radio stations.

Comments

Not the point.

[Hsensei]

Isn't the whole point to kill off 90% of internet radio?

In a weird and twisted way..

[Anonymous Coward]

..I almost hope they succeed in killing off "legit" Internet Radio. The Internet could really use a nice dose of the good old Pirate Radio culture.

Re:I have a good amount...

[QRDeNameland]

Why? If they are playing copyrighted music, why should they not follow the same rules as the commercial stations?

OK, do you know how much over-the-air commercial radio stations pay to the RIAA for recording royalties? It *is* $0.

It seems to be a little known fact, but regular over-the-airwave radio, since its inception, has only had to pay songwriting royalties (i.e., those collected by ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC) for any songs they broadcast, but have never had to pay recording royalties ("mechanicals", in the trade). Why? Because it was always seen as a mutually beneficial arrangement: the radio station gets to sell advertising time over free use of the recordings, the copyright holders of the recording get free exposure which helps them sell records.

The whole point here is that they *do* want different rules for internet radio...that the RIAA thinks internet radio *should* pay mechanical royalties over-the-air broadcasters don't, and they've been doing this for over 12 years now, and it most definitely *has* hurt internet radio.