SoundExchange Backs Off DRM for Webcasters

Radio Free Europe writes "The big news is not that SoundExchange has repackaged the same royalty proposal that small webcasters rejected in May, but that SoundExchange has dropped its previous insistence that DRM be a part of any agreement. 'On the bright side, it doesn't appear as if DRM is part of the terms this time around. Previously, SoundExchange stated that webcasters who agree to the deal must actively "work to stop users from engaging in 'streamripping'." This began a war of words between the Digital Media Association (DiMA) and SoundExchange, with DiMA accusing SoundExchange of using rate negotiations to push mandatory DRM. SoundExchange's letter leaves the much-maligned streamripping issue out of the discussion, clearing at least that hurdle.'"

Comments

How to Run a Company into the Red

[Anonymous Coward]

SoundExchange has no idea how to create a viable business model. The money is not in charging the broadcasters, rather its in free promotion coupled with aggressive web marketing.

They should cut a deal with broadcasters that offers free music in exchange for relevant ads and links to store fronts were a listener can purchase the music. They should also offer discounts on packaged songs that they want to push on the market.

They could be influencing lesser known genres such as indie and techno, and popularize and brand a new line of music.

They could completely rule this new medium and reap the rewards, instead they are going to force broadcasters overseas and lose even more money to pirates.

I am just sitting here shaking my head in disbelief at the shear stupidity of their business model.

Re:How to Run a Company into the Red

[djasbestos]

Business model is the same as any other perfect enterprise in this country: have people throwing money at you for doing nothing because it's the law. GREED.

In the words of Lewis Black: "Piggy, piggy, piggy, fuck, piggy, piggy." or "Even the greediest people in the world said: 'Wow...that's fuckin' greedy!'"

Re:Dump SoundExchange artists instead?

[BootNinja]

The problem with your suggestions is that SoundExchange, while being a subsidiary of the RIAA is still authorized to collect all compulsory royalties due whether or not they are due to RIAA members. So your suggestion holds no water.

They know exactly what they are doing.

[twitter]

SoundExchange has no idea how to create a viable business model. The money is not in charging the broadcasters, rather its in free promotion coupled with aggressive web marketing. They should cut a deal with broadcasters that offers free music in exchange for relevant ads and links to store fronts were a listener can purchase the music.

You are kidding?

SoundExchange has been given monopoly status. Everyone has to pay fees to them, and this tiny concession is meaningless when you consider the big picture: they get to pick and chose who runs internet "radio" stations. They can block all but RIAA members and force membership. As soon as they are sure of control, all the concessions will be undone and prices will be hiked up to terrestrial broadcast levels. Kiss variety, choice and artistic freedom goodbye.

It's a license to extend their little analog empire into the future. They are going to keep limiting who the "winners" are. A small number of acts will continue to be "pushed" as you put it, at the exclusion of all others. Bands that want to give their music away and advertise in the way you think would be best for them are not going to be able to do it. They are going to have to crawl on their knees and "prove" themselves in some "target" market, just like they do now, before internet radio stations will "risk" playing them. Without the odious fees the old industry is going to impose, the costs of running a web broadcast are very low, there are no risks and everyone is free to give their music away.

There is absolutely no justification for this. There is no scarce public resource involved and therefore no reason to regulate the internet. Your rights have been sold and the RIAA is going to keep raking in the cash at everyone else's expense.

Re:They know exactly what they are doing.

[iminplaya]

Your rights have been sold and the RIAA is going to keep raking in the cash at everyone else's expense.

I wish they were sold. I might have collected a healthy profit. No, what happened is that they were given away... by us.

Re:They know exactly what they are doing.

[jmccay]

IANAL, but isn't maintaining and creating a monopoly illegal in the US? The RIAA, and all their bastard children, just use mob enforcement tactics to raise money. Isn't this just more shakedowns from these guys? While I doubt we'll get anywhere with them. Their existence needs to be challenged. They are attempting to stifle there only real competition--internet radio.

      The only sure way to stop them is to stop feeding them. Stop buying CDs. Stop going to concerts. Stop buying t-shirts. Every time you buy this stuff, you are feeding their hunger and greed for more. Don't be surprised if there's a new digital format forced down your throat that requires a per listening fee. Stop feeding the RIAA and there scumbag children. If you want music go to independent music.

Re:Dump SoundExchange artists instead?

[SaturnNiGHTS]

that's correct...soundexchange is still legally allowed to take royalties on any music that is taken at any time, in case that the artist later signs with the riaa, to possibly take some of their ill-collected royalties back.

SoundExchange should be before the RICO judge

[crovira]

because its just an extortion racket.

Let me get this straight...

SoundExchange are going to collect $50k from each and every WebCaster radio station.

Then the artists have to find out wether they played their songs, or not, from every single WebCaster. (If you believe people are consistently that diligent, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.)

Then the artists have to figure out how much of those $50ks SoundExchange might owe the artist. (Some of these guys and gals can play great. Math, they're not so hot at.)

Then the artists have to try to collect, less the euphemistically called administration fees of course (can you say 110%.)

Get the "Piperazine"! I'm looking at a nastytape worm here.