Slashdot Mirror
Internet Radio's "Last Stand"
We've been discussing the plight of Internet radio for some time, as the Copyright Royalty Board imposed royalties that industry observers predicted would prove lethal to the nascent industry. We discussed Web radio's day of silence in protest, which won the industry a reprieve, and the futile efforts to find relief in Congress. Now it's looking as if the last act is indeed close. Death Metal Maniac sends along this Washington Post story with extensive quotes from Pandora CEO Tim Westergren, who said: "The moment we think this problem in Washington is not going to get solved, we have to pull the plug because all we're doing is wasting money... We're funded by venture capital. They're not going to chase a company whose business model has been broken." The article estimates that XM Satellite Radio will pay "about 1.6 cents per hour per listener when the new rates are fully adapted in 2010. By contrast, Web radio outlets will pay 2.91 cents per hour per listener." That's 70% of projected revenue for Pandora; smaller players estimate the hit at 100% to 300% of revenue.
SoundExchange doesn't care. As a branch off of the major labels, the death of internet radio as we know it is almost a best case scenario. Once gone, they can shape the market the way they want to see it without interference from innovative small radio pioneers. This has less to do with getting money than it is about having a stranglehold on the internet market.
before you die? I started listening to Internet radio seven months ago. Since then, I haven't listened to my MP3 collection at all, or been on any file sharing networks to expand it.
...and now they want me to go back to my MP3 collection? Surely, they're not dumb enough to believe that I'll go back to Clear Channel? Right?
I've been exposed to and promoted countless new bands that I never would have heard of on my own.
They'll claim that there will still be "radio" on the internet offered from regular radio stations. However, that is only a gimmick and advertising to promote another separate business (the original radio station), and means that an entire industry is being destroyed.
This move makes no sense other than to "test the waters" to see how far they can push business before they go bust.
What we see in the US is not capitalism, it is corpratism, an unholy alliance between large corporations and the government. This is why you see laws created to make more profit for large companies, and bail outs from the government to large companies who lose a substation amount of capital due to bad business practices.
If we had real capitalism in this country, even capitalism with regulated markets (you know, laws to live by, like every other Individual has to follow) we would have a lot more innovation and new industries would rise up over night because they do not have to contend with being killed in the crib by a new law passed to favor established markets.
Ah, that's the Dark Side of greed.
The Light Side of greed sparks innovation because folks have an incentive to make money by creating something new.
The Dark Side always goes after the weak: the ones that can't innovate. It promises easy money, high barriers to entry with laws and regulations, keeping the status quo. Some greed masters like Masters Jobs and Wozniak break into a field of greed. They, being great greed masters, broke IBM along with another, though maligned greed master, Gates. But even then, The Dark Side can even ake the best of us as it did Master Gates. He seams to be coming back to the Light Side with his charity work.
Pay heed young greed patiwan, the Dark Side is always there for the lazy!
Me too. Pandora is *awesome* (I'm listening to it now). I started listening to net radio back when di.fm was still DigitallyImported.com and I needed a little music while I was coding.
Now though... I work from home, I don't have a stereo with a radio in it. My only radio is internet radio. This is garbage. Ironically this will mean that RIAA and the like will be getting much less of my money. I'll be finding fewer bands whose music I like, buying fewer CDs as a result and they'll be getting no revenue from the Internet radio I listen to. I'm not sure what makes them think this is a good business choice.
You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
There is a point when trying to fight the society with it's own rules is futile.
Think about what this sick society orders you: You have to believe in stupid jesus, you can't smoke pot, you can't have privacy, you can't listen to music, Save on your energy use so the big industries can have more oil for them, You can't say shit on tv, blah blah blah!!!
B U L L S H I T.
Screw them, most of what we do daily to maintain some level of freedom in our lives is illegal. If you really abide by all the rules, pay all the taxes, and stick to stupid society's moral rules, YOU ARE NOT ALIVE, you become a Zombie.
I'll sniff, drink, believe, take, download, copy, share, do, read, write, think, say, modify, film and build WHATEVER THE FUCK I WANT.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Meh, instead of a technical network like that, where everyone's living in fear of being shut down, I'd rather a more logical/social network, where people can, get this... create free music under CC/similar licenses and let other people actually listen to it...
When laws are passed that drive a company out of business because it's no longer economical to consume their product (internet radio), that really is the government and not the consumer's fault. When a transaction is taxed for more than anyone is willing to pay for it, it stops happening legally.
All the FM stations got bought out by Clearchannel and other conglomerates, and they all play the same songs broadcast from a central location. No more local DJs, no more local news, no more local weather, no more local music.
FM radio puts an emphasis on back catalog - rarely is there any new music that appeals to me. I do not care for hip hop, rap, etc. There is no variety in music, and there is a lot of music out there (esp independent labels) that is not getting played on FM radio.
Payola has pushed the independents out of FM radio. Nobody wants to admit that there is a white elephant in the room. Because the radio conglomerates have gotten greedy, the music variety suffers.
The obesity of advertising - way too much of it - has driven listeners away from FM radio. They are tired of the high ad-to-program ratio of program time. Radio conglomerates got too greedy when they consolidated all the FM stations and then tried to raise revenue through advertising.
The end result is a mass exodus of listeners away from FM radio. Many of my friends no longer listen to radio and they listen to songs on their ipods, their mp3 car radios, their internet radios, etc.
Independent labels found an outlet through internet radio and former FM radio listeners are embracing it enthusiastically. The FM radio lobby is extremely powerful and they conspired to use the royalty fees to drive the internet radio out of the market. That is not how capitalism is supposed to work.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
... even if you play ONLY indie, free music, you are still subject to SoundExchanges fees.
That, above anything the recording industry has done-- aside from possibly the litigation/extortion campaign-- gets my goat. The nerve of those people, claiming to collect royalties for people who didn't ask for compensation of any sort. The fact that Congress let them collect and pocket indie music royalties, at rates decided by a few appointed-by-RIAA judges, is one of the best examples of how truly evil the recording industry is.
I have to ask those of you who are artists, lyricists, composers, and managers trying to scrape by under the cartel labels: Seriously, what makes you think that the execs who green-lighted the driftnet lawsuits, or the suits at SoundExchange with nothing better to do than sue people who play loud boomboxes in garages, give a rat's ass about how you're struggling to make a fair living? I'm betting that in order for you to get their full promotional and distributive services, you have to sign away the copyrights to your songs and become contractually obligated to make more at a factory's pace. Meanwhile, their lobbyists continue to tell Congress that a human's lifetime plus a half is still not enough to recoup the losses-- they want the copyright term to be longer and more indefinite. They're not going to let your work go where it can be seen or heard by everyone, they want to be the gatekeepers who dictate who gets to hear your works, when, and for how much. All they have to do to keep the prominent artists on their side is to entice them with lots of money and swag, and all they have to do to keep the lesser-known artists is to handcuff them with the contract, and/or feed them the RIAA propaganda that even a fleeting reference is a stolen song.
That a judge hasn't struck down the Bono amendment to the Copyright Act as unconstitutional, or the fact that SoundExchange essentially makes money off the backs of all musicians has not been challenged in the judiciary, is appalling on many levels.
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."