Slashdot Mirror
Doom and Gloom for Web Radio
DailyTech posted interviews with the founder of Pandora and management from Proton Radio (and Proton Music) asking them what SoundExchange's latest rulings mean to them. A lot of net radio stations are dreading the upcoming changes in royalty rates, which are said to be around 400%... a number that would bankrupt most of the industry. An interesting read for anyone who uses online radio.
Web Radio has been a great vehicle for me to discover new music. I have bought a lot more music lately because of discovering new artists which I heard through Web Radio. I Don't know why the industry is hell-bent on destroying a good thing for both the music industry and the consumer. I just don't get it! I'm mad and frustrated...
Royalties kill the internet radio star....
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
What do nerd libertarians that listen to internet radio think about this?
I have been listening to SOMA and Bartok radio for years. It's wonderful stuff and a lot better than whats on broadcast radio. It all flows together and they get new stuff inserted in there, too.
It's a lot better than listening to all my stuff I know by heart and just hitting 'shuffle'.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
In terms of choosing tracks you like, you have a strong argument.
However, if your approach to life is that predictable gets boring, or you like the idea of hearing things you've never heard before, then you can see how the "best mix" for some of us cannot be comprised only of artists we already know.
But there's also the question of what you're in the mood for. I like having the choice of radio vs. my own collection. If I'm in the mood for my own selection, I've got it. If I want to hear new stuff, there's the radio. And with both a wide selection of stations and services using predictive algorithms to select tracks I might like, I have a lot of control over the degree of randomness in the mix of music I get from the radio.
It's that mix of my music vs. radio that's the important thing for me - I confess it's a small part of my listening time is to internet radio. But a small percentage across millions of potential audience members is enough to justify the internet radio stations. Unless royalties are raised so high it puts them out of business.
The point of most markets (and commercial arrangements) is to find a price suitable to both parties. Pricing internet stations out of the game, when they could otherwise provide a useful service to a niche market, is an abuse of power. It's a bad thing.
The problem with just playing your own mp3 list is that you're not exposed to anything new. I'm not a big fan of DJ'd web music for the very reasons you list. I prefer Pandora, which basically takes the Songs/Artists you like, deconstructs them according to their fundamental nature (like dynamic male vocalist, major key tonality, rhythm guitar, etc) and then using some complex math finds other types of music based on those properties. You then fine tune it using a like/dislike button. It actually works very well and I've found some new music that I really like. Plus I don't find myself fast-forwarding through songs like I do on Yahoo's music service.
The thing is where did you get that music and hear it in the first place?
A lot of these radiostations, offer more than just music, but also commentary and talk. I've heard a lot of artists for the first time on net radio. Some of the songs I've heard over the net are tapes and recordings where the only copy exists at the station itself or are from local artists who don't have big record deals.
Every artist listed in the above post is main stream.
How about Becket and Frenz, Kraftwerk, or atomisk? How about traditional German, African, or any other ethnic music that isn't run through the pop-radio filter?
What is being taken out here are the artists, music and sounds that DON'T often have a record label or that you probably haven't heard of. Good stuff, that deserves to be aired. Granted perhaps most of it doesn't fit the tastes of enough people for it to belong on a major channel, but that doesn't mean it isn't good enough to be played and shared over the radio, either through the spectrum or the wires.
This is an important issue, and if net radio goes down, even if you don't listen. Just wait till they get around to your corner of the net.
Actually, it's the RIAA labels doing it. SoundExchange charges royalties on behalf of RIAA members and others- it is
the creation of RIAA, in reality. Now, think about it... They largely have control over the media markets through
the means and connections they already have with Radio- but don't have any positive control over anything in the
case of web radio. Very probably never will because the bar to entry is very shallow. Sure it kind of scares the
ClearChannel's of the world, but in the end, it's just another format for them to step into. In the end, they can
compete decently well in that space- but there's still no way to control you or I stepping up to the plate and putting
out stuff that's got NOTHING to do with the labels. Classical. Renaissance. Celtic. And, so forth.
RIAA's members and RIAA themselves do not like that thought at all.
They exist right at the moment to strip mine what we call culture right at the moment. In order for them to maximize
profits (and make the Daytraders happy...) they need to have nearly absolute control on what comes out as usable
music, etc. so that they can extract every dollar they can out of us. Well, so long as people don't realize they're
getting short-changed by these jokers.
Web Radio was helping people find music that the big media conglomerates (You had it right- just the wrong conglomerates)
like Sony BMG, Warner, etc. just have no interest in backing and producing content for- EVER. They don't want that.
Which is why we're here now, discussing this.
The players involved with the compulsory licensing should not be involved in setting the pricing, etc.
Someone that doesn't ever touch content covered by the licensing should not have to pay for it- if they've
got deals with all the performers that are being given "airtime" online, they shouldn't have to pay and if
they break the rules, then they should pay a dear price for that act of infringement.
But, that's not what is going on, now is it?
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
I have purchased dozens of songs from iTunes because.... ...I heard them on net radio.
WHY THE FUCK is the industry trying to kill something that is MAKING THEM MONEY!? I don't understand these morons! Internet radio is like FREE ADVERTISING. It has introduced me to songs I've NEVER HEARD BEFORE, and ended up enjoying enough to purchase legally!
Are these people morons? I know the answer is obviously yes, but damn! Why are such idiots in control of such valuable intellectual property? Radio play can MAKE or BREAK a song.
And the funniest part? A lot of songs that net radio introduces to people may be older, more obscure back catalog stuff. Stuff that costs the record companies $0 to produce, because it's ALREADY PRODUCED. It's like FREE MONEY.
*grumble* I'm just exasperated at how STUPID record company execs are sometimes. They can make their millions without being total ASSHOLES, but they chose to be assholes anyway.
It's not just a jukebox playing a set of music. There's a DJ, who talks to the listeners, and builds a rapport with them, adding variety and features to the show. That's why drivetime radio in the morning and evening is so popular - people like the DJ as well as the music he's playing. There's also the prospect of being introduced to new music you've never heard before.
I DJ (or rather, I present a show, since I'm not spinning decks) on EVE-Radio, a web radio station for the MMO EVE-Online, and I can tell you that's what people like about the radio. It's amplified, in the case of EVE Radio, as the listeners can actually come into the EVE Radio chat channel and talk with the DJ and other listeners, so it's far more communal than you sat at home, or in the car, tuned into your favourite station. Radio as a whole, offers more variety than just sticking in a CD you burned, or playing from your MP3 library. That's what people like about it, and that's what other people don't like about it.
A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.
The RIAA has been trying for years, without success, to pass legislation to require all internet radio broadcasters to use DRM in their streams. In practice this means only one thing: they desperately want to make it illegal to broadcast internet radio in mp3 format.
The RIAA has got in their heads that the combination of DRM-free readio broadcasts in mp3 format with tools such as StreamRipper is leading to rampant music piracy. I have no idea how rampant the piracy actually is, but it could be bad at least in theory. The problem is that it is possible, with relatively little technical know how, to point a tool like StreamRipper at, just for example, one of the many fine music 128k music channels available at somafm.com, leave it running, and come back a day or 2 later to a directory containing gigabytes of free MP3 music.
Anyway, since they have not been able to make mp3 broadcasting illegal, SoundExchange's behavior is simply the RIAA attacking the "problem" from a new front. They want to shut web broadcasters down. They know the new rates are way too high! That's the whole point. They want to bankrupt all the broadcasters who are streaming near-CD-quality mp3s out to the world for free.
I read Usenet for the articles.