...yet even The Huffington Post gets connived into publishing RIAA talking points to the contrary.
Here is my unedited response to their Radio Will Stop Playing Music piece:
To claim that MTV had no promotional value is absurd. Artists whose videos were played on MTV were exposed to millions of consumers and, as a result, those artists sold more product than had MTV not played their video.
Back in MTV's heyday, the recording industry (aka the major labels) spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on single promotional videos. That's what they were called: promotional. The major labels decided it was a good investment to spend big money to impress MTV to get the airplay to promote their products.
The same "airplay is promotional" has also long been true of radio, which is why for decades record labels illegally paid (payola) to get their records on the air. Labels gladly paid it. The fact that payola ever existed proves the point: labels paid radio to play and thereby promote their records.
You say: "the recording industry did not have strong enough lobbying power against the broadcasters in 1976 when the copyright law was amended."
Yeah, poor, out-moneyed recording industry! And then you continue, without irony, to state:
"Thankfully, the recording industry was smarter when it came to webcasters, satellite radio providers" as if those not-yet-in-existence in 1996 industries had a seat at the lobbying table when the Telecommunications Act to which you refer was created.
Finally, the misleading old: "people don't tune in to hear commercials." That's not even an argument, it's a misleading obfuscation. Commercials pay for operating costs. They are a necessity for free, over-the-air radio. Without advertising, free over-the-air radio would not exist. Listeners understand that. Do all music-loving radio-listeners (except advertisers) wish it could be all music, all the time? Sure. The terrestrial radio industry is simply not set up to work that way.
People tune in to hear music, and when they hear it on the radio, there is a chance listeners will go out and buy it, and maybe some t-shirts and other merchandise, and maybe buy a ticket to a live performance. If people don't hear it on the radio...they might not hear it at all. Where does that leave the artists?
Ted Leibowitz, BAGeL Radio
Showing posts with label internet radio equality act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label internet radio equality act. Show all posts
Monday, October 12, 2009
Thursday, March 05, 2009
SoundExchange Offers Webcasters Unacceptable Take-It-Or-Leave-It Offer
From Radio & Internet Newsletter:
In a column today about the ongoing judicial appeal of the 2006-10 CRB royalty decision, San Francisco-based MarketWatch columnist Therese Poletti writes, "The dysfunctional music industry suffers from a classic case of biting the hand that feeds it.Read the entire MarketWatch story here.
"Over the last two years," she notes, "record companies have tried to squeeze excessive royalties from Internet-radio stations — the very stations that can help fuel future digital-music sales — and it's endangering some Web-based radio firms." Poletti argues that the exposure and sales Internet radio affords and generates are benefits, not challenges to the embattled industry.
Most who are close to negotiations seem to want to stay mum about the situation; Poletti says reps of Pandora and SoundExchange didn't want to talk to her.
But Michael Spiegelman, head of Yahoo Music, is somewhat more removed, as his company recently turned over its webcasting business to CBS Radio (as has AOL, both companies citing the rising costs of licensing as a major impetus). Spiegelman told MarketWatch, "Internet radio facilitated discovery while compensating artists and labels for their effort. They may feel in the short term (the high royalty rate) gets them a better revenue stream. But in the short term, it's driving the Webcasters out of business."
Closer to the action is Jon Potter, head of DiMA (Digital Media Association, which represents large company webcasters). He says the record industry isn't even actually negotiating. "We were presented with a take-it-or-leave-it offer from SoundExchange. It was unacceptable."
Poletti, a senior columnist for MarketWatch, concludes, "I hope the appellate court is more sympathetic to the young Webcasting firms than the CRB. But the music industry never should have let their negotiations derail this badly. Once again, the industry seems to be using artists as a cover for incessant greed. Instead, they should encourage as much legal digital music as possible."
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Must Pandora Die?
From Kurt Hanson of AccuRadio:
More from Kurt's blog post at Radio And Internet Newsletter:
The Internet radio royalty crisis may be coming to a head, as one of the country's most-beloved webcasters, Pandora, tells the Washington Post that it is on the verge of shutting down over the issue.Read Kurt's explanation here.
As you know, the problem in a nutshell is that whereas all other forms of radio in the U.S. and around the world pay about 3%-5% of their revenues as a royalty to songwriters and 0%-7% of their revenues as a royalty to labels and performers, last year the U.S.'s Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) set that second royalty rate for Internet radio to the equivalent of 70% to 300% of revenues.
While there's a judicial appeal of this decision in progress, plus occasional negotiations going on between SoundExchange (representing labels and musicians) and various subsets of webcasters, plus bills introduced in Congress that would roll back the CRB decision, none of these fixes may happen before Pandora's venture capitalists decide to give up and pull the plug on the service.
What are they thinking?!
I've been talking to several journalists this week about the issue, and the question they always ask me is this: "Trying to bankrupt your industry doesn't make any sense! WHY is SoundExchange doing this?"
More from Kurt's blog post at Radio And Internet Newsletter:
If Pandora is forced to shut down, the outrage will be huge - among consumers, journalists, bloggers, working musicians, and even Congressional staffs.
That will be the tipping point that either (1) triggers a consumer backlash against the RIAA, which, if expressed in the form of a boycott, as some bloggers have proposed, could cost the industry hundreds of millions of dollars in record sales, (2) leads to belated reasonable negotiations from SoundExchange, and/or (3) spurs Congress to pass the Internet Radio Equality Act.
But Pandora doesn't deserve to be the sacrificial lamb that keeps other webcasters alive. They're loved by millions of listeners, and they've been great for musicians, fair to labels, and generous to their fellow webcasters.
Either SoundExchange or Congress should act quickly enough to stave that outcome off.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Webcaster Royalty Rates Update
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on "Assuring Fair Rates and Rules across Platforms" did not go well for webcasters. Instead of discussing the merits of royalty rate platform parity (where webcasters would pay rates similar to satellite and cable radio), Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-RIAA) -- who always advocates for the Major Labels -- predictably wasted everyone's time pushing the PERFORM Act, legislation based on RIAA talking points.
PERFORM instists that internet radio stations are music distribution services (read: download), not performance services (which radio has always been considered), and as such internet radio should pay crazy high licensing fees for playing music. This premise is patently false and simply parrots an RIAA party line.
At the hearing a stooge from Geffen Records pulled a McCain, conflating internet radio with illegal file-sharing. And I quote, “The last time we had a technology…that was thought of as necessary for the industry, for the good of music, necessary for the good of the people, it was called Napster.”
Another poisonous part of the PERFORM Act requires that internet radio abandon MP3 streaming in favor of a crippled-by-DRM audio format. This also parrots an RIAA lie, one which suggests that music sales are down because internet radio fans are copying songs from streams and saving these files instead of buying music.
"Stream ripping" is hardly the reason music sales are down. Recordings of internet radio streams are very low-fidelity and contain songs that often bleed into one another due to cross-fading and sometimes have DJs talking over them. Recording internet radio is like when I was in junior high school and wanted to record that new Killing Joke single they were playing on WLIR -- I used to hit play/pause on my cassette deck. The resultant mix tapes were hardly a replacement for a record collection. Those mixes served to reinforce which albums I needed to go buy.
If anyone wants to know why people choose to share files instead of buying them, one needs to look no further than the results of recent decisions by both Yahoo! Music and Microsoft Music Network to close their digital doors rendering useless music files consumers thought they'd purchased (What? You thought you bought songs just because you clicked on a button that said "BUY" and then paid for them?! Silly consumers!). It should be noted that DRM was forced onto the retailers by the RIAA, and that music industry people now suggest that consumers who are pissed about their soon-to-evaporate music purchases should have read their End User License Agreements more closely. Seriously. That's the response. And they wonder why otherwise law-abiding folks might prefer to find illegal (but not DRM-crippled) files to download instead!
Several small webcasters submitted written statements to the Sentate Judiciary committee to make sure that we were heard from. Read our friend Rusty of SomaFM's statement here, and Kurt of AccuRadio's statement here.
PERFORM instists that internet radio stations are music distribution services (read: download), not performance services (which radio has always been considered), and as such internet radio should pay crazy high licensing fees for playing music. This premise is patently false and simply parrots an RIAA party line.
At the hearing a stooge from Geffen Records pulled a McCain, conflating internet radio with illegal file-sharing. And I quote, “The last time we had a technology…that was thought of as necessary for the industry, for the good of music, necessary for the good of the people, it was called Napster.”
Another poisonous part of the PERFORM Act requires that internet radio abandon MP3 streaming in favor of a crippled-by-DRM audio format. This also parrots an RIAA lie, one which suggests that music sales are down because internet radio fans are copying songs from streams and saving these files instead of buying music.
"Stream ripping" is hardly the reason music sales are down. Recordings of internet radio streams are very low-fidelity and contain songs that often bleed into one another due to cross-fading and sometimes have DJs talking over them. Recording internet radio is like when I was in junior high school and wanted to record that new Killing Joke single they were playing on WLIR -- I used to hit play/pause on my cassette deck. The resultant mix tapes were hardly a replacement for a record collection. Those mixes served to reinforce which albums I needed to go buy.
If anyone wants to know why people choose to share files instead of buying them, one needs to look no further than the results of recent decisions by both Yahoo! Music and Microsoft Music Network to close their digital doors rendering useless music files consumers thought they'd purchased (What? You thought you bought songs just because you clicked on a button that said "BUY" and then paid for them?! Silly consumers!). It should be noted that DRM was forced onto the retailers by the RIAA, and that music industry people now suggest that consumers who are pissed about their soon-to-evaporate music purchases should have read their End User License Agreements more closely. Seriously. That's the response. And they wonder why otherwise law-abiding folks might prefer to find illegal (but not DRM-crippled) files to download instead!
Several small webcasters submitted written statements to the Sentate Judiciary committee to make sure that we were heard from. Read our friend Rusty of SomaFM's statement here, and Kurt of AccuRadio's statement here.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
RIAA To Lose Funding?
Ars Technica reports that EMI, one of the Big Four Labels, is considering cutting funding for recording industry trade groups -- including the RIAA.The RIAA campaign of intimidation via lawsuits against file sharers has been a financial disaster and an even greater public relations disaster. This may be why EMI is considering reallocating the funds used by the RIAA to invade their customers' privacy, sue their target audience, sue dead people, collude on price-fixing, and make false and/or misleading statements.
Via it's front group SoundExchange the RIAA is also responsible for the precarious place (financially and legally) webcasting is in right now thanks to the ridiculous Copyright Royalty Rate hike on internet radio earlier this year.
If EMI pulls funding it would stand to reason that the rest of the Big Four would follow suit. Could this mean the end, or at least the declawing, of the winner of the 2007 Worst Company In America award, The RIAA? I'm not getting my hopes up, but man does that thought make me smile.
A tip of the headphones to Ars Technica via Gizmodo via State Of The Day.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Internet Radio Survival Update
Some people deny Global Warming. The rest of us know that it is a real and dangerous phenomenon that needs to be dealt with it.
Some people (the RIAA and it's front groups) deny that exposing music via airplay has promotional value. The rest if us know that these denials are lies, and these people prove daily that they are lying by continuing to spend millions promoting music to radio. Here's a new strategy that counters the BS denials. I like a lot:
Meanwhile SoundExchange, the front group for the RIAA (which is a front group for the major record labels) recently proposed that cable radio pay a copyright royalty fee of less than 7.5% of their revenue. SoundExchange strongly opposes the Internet Radio Equality Act, which calls for almost exactly the same copyright royalty rate for internet radio. Why the discrepancy?
Webcasters would jump at a deal like this, yet it is not being offered to us. SoundExchange continues to insist that it is negotiating in good faith. It's kinda like the Bush administration feigning disapproval of the FEMA tactic of holding a fake news conference.
From SaveNetRadio.org:
Some people (the RIAA and it's front groups) deny that exposing music via airplay has promotional value. The rest if us know that these denials are lies, and these people prove daily that they are lying by continuing to spend millions promoting music to radio. Here's a new strategy that counters the BS denials. I like a lot:
A bipartisan resolution recognizing the promotional value of free radio airplay was introduced last week in the U.S. House of Representatives. The resolution was introduced by Reps. GENE GREEN (D-TX) and MIKE CONAWAY (R-TX) and cosponsored by 51 additional members of Congress.It's nice having the NAB on our side.
"Congress should not impose any new performance fee, tax, royalty, or other charge relating to the public performance of sound recordings on a local radio station for broadcasting sound recordings over-the-air, or on any business for such public performance of sound recordings," read House Concurrent Resolution 244.
Commenting on the resolution's introduction, NAB EVPO DENNIS WHARTON said, "NAB salutes Reps. GREEN and CONAWAY and their House colleagues for formally recognizing radio airplay's enormous value to both record labels and recording artists. The undeniable fact is that radio airplay is a musician's greatest promotional tool and generates millions of dollars in revenue annually for RIAA-member companies and performers."
Meanwhile SoundExchange, the front group for the RIAA (which is a front group for the major record labels) recently proposed that cable radio pay a copyright royalty fee of less than 7.5% of their revenue. SoundExchange strongly opposes the Internet Radio Equality Act, which calls for almost exactly the same copyright royalty rate for internet radio. Why the discrepancy?
Webcasters would jump at a deal like this, yet it is not being offered to us. SoundExchange continues to insist that it is negotiating in good faith. It's kinda like the Bush administration feigning disapproval of the FEMA tactic of holding a fake news conference.
From SaveNetRadio.org:
The SaveNetRadio Campaign today expressed surprise and hope upon learning that SoundExchange has formally proposed that cable radio services pay royalties between 7.25% and 7.5% of their revenue to sound recording copyright owners and recording artists. This proposed rate, effective from 2008 to 2012, is virtually identical to rates endorsed by moreWouldn't it be something if the little guys finally forced a little fairness out of the big guys?
than 140 cosponsors of the Internet Radio Equality Act, but rejected by SoundExchange and the Recording Industry Association of America.
"Perhaps this agreement means that SoundExchange agrees that 7.5% of revenue is a fair rate; they just prefer that the rate not be legislated," Jake Ward, a spokesperson for the SaveNetRadio campaign said. "The Internet radio industry has never asked for more than royalty parity and an opportunity to grow their businesses to the benefit of artists, consumers, and even record labels. Perhaps SoundExchange's agreement that cable radio should pay 7.5% of revenue is a precursor to an equivalent offer for Internet radio services. It is hard to imagine that recording industry interests would continue to reject Congressional legislation and webcasters' efforts to set fair royalty rates while simultaneously agreeing to the same standard for cable radio services."
The Internet Radio Equality Act -- H.R. 2060 and S. 1353 -- would vacate the March 2nd Copyright Royalty Board's decision and set a 2006-2010 royalty rate at a competitive level with royalties paid by cable and satellite radio services (7.5% of revenue.) The bill would also change the royalty rate-setting standard used in royalty arbitrations, so that the standard applied to webcasters would align with that applied to cable and satellite radio.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Please Ask Your Senator to Attend the Future of Radio Hearing on Wednesday, 10/24
From SaveNetRadio.org:
Thank you once again for your support of the SaveNetRadio Campaign. On Wednesday morning, the Senate Commerce Committee will meet to hold a hearing on the future of radio in the United States. Representatives from broadcast radio, music industry, and Internet radio will testify before the committee about the current state of the radio industry and how royalty fees and other issues, like competition and innovation, affect the future of the industry. This is an unprecedented opportunity for Internet radio to explain its value to Congress, and we need your help to make sure they are listening.
Please take a moment to call Senator Boxer at (202) 224 - 3553 and ask her to attend this important hearing. The Internet Radio Equality Act is still pending in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives; this hearing will give Members an opportunity to learn more about this legislation - make sure they don't miss it. Please call now.
It is helpful when calling your congressional representatives to give the following information:
* I am a constituent, and an Internet radio listener calling to ask that as a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, the Senator attend Wednesday's hearing on the future of radio.
* Internet radio has been a revolutionary force in the music industry since its creation and now empowers artist, consumers, and music lovers of every kind. The Copyright Royalty Board's unprecedented and ill informed decision to increase royalty fees for Webcasters by more than 300% has threatened to bankrupt this important industry and we need the Senator's help.
* The real future of radio for music lovers, artists, and the music industry as a whole is online. To save this industry and allow it to prosper, there must be parity and equality between webcasters, satellite radio, and broadcast radio. Today Internet radio pays a recording royalty fee more than twice that of satellite radio, and terrestrial radio pays none at all. To fix this unfair and inexplicable inequality, please cosponsor the Internet Radio Equality Act, S. 1353, pending in the Senate today.
Again, please call Senator Boxer at (202) 224 - 3553 and ask her to attend this important hearing. Thank you once again for your support of the SaveNetRadio campaign, this issue could not have gotten the attention it has without your support and cannot move any further without your continued efforts.
Thank you once again for your support of the SaveNetRadio Campaign. On Wednesday morning, the Senate Commerce Committee will meet to hold a hearing on the future of radio in the United States. Representatives from broadcast radio, music industry, and Internet radio will testify before the committee about the current state of the radio industry and how royalty fees and other issues, like competition and innovation, affect the future of the industry. This is an unprecedented opportunity for Internet radio to explain its value to Congress, and we need your help to make sure they are listening.
Please take a moment to call Senator Boxer at (202) 224 - 3553 and ask her to attend this important hearing. The Internet Radio Equality Act is still pending in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives; this hearing will give Members an opportunity to learn more about this legislation - make sure they don't miss it. Please call now.
It is helpful when calling your congressional representatives to give the following information:
* I am a constituent, and an Internet radio listener calling to ask that as a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, the Senator attend Wednesday's hearing on the future of radio.
* Internet radio has been a revolutionary force in the music industry since its creation and now empowers artist, consumers, and music lovers of every kind. The Copyright Royalty Board's unprecedented and ill informed decision to increase royalty fees for Webcasters by more than 300% has threatened to bankrupt this important industry and we need the Senator's help.
* The real future of radio for music lovers, artists, and the music industry as a whole is online. To save this industry and allow it to prosper, there must be parity and equality between webcasters, satellite radio, and broadcast radio. Today Internet radio pays a recording royalty fee more than twice that of satellite radio, and terrestrial radio pays none at all. To fix this unfair and inexplicable inequality, please cosponsor the Internet Radio Equality Act, S. 1353, pending in the Senate today.
Again, please call Senator Boxer at (202) 224 - 3553 and ask her to attend this important hearing. Thank you once again for your support of the SaveNetRadio campaign, this issue could not have gotten the attention it has without your support and cannot move any further without your continued efforts.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Royalty Negotiations Drag On
David Oxenford, representing a small group of internet broadcasters, reports on the latest negotiations between the group he represents (Small Commerical Webcasters) and SoundExchange. Without stating it directly Oxenford makes it clear that negotiations over new royalty rates and related issues are going slowly and will require action by Congress.At least the SCW group gets to negotiate. The rest of us are left hanging, or are sent laughable non-offers designed to make it look to Congress and the press like SoundExchange is really trying to work things out.
Read more at Oxenford's Broadcast Law Blog, via Radio and Internet Newsletter (RAIN).
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
SoundExchange Blows Smoke; Webcasters Yawn
This week SoundExchange, the organization created to disperse royalty payments from internet radio to artist, unveiled a new settlement offer to small webcasters. This "offer" is a joke. For a small webcaster looking to strike a fair deal it is completely useless.The offer is a smokescreen intended to make it appear to Congress, the media, and the public that the RIAA is negotiating in good faith with webcasters. Perhaps the pre-recess threat by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Sam Brownback (R-KS) to bring the Internet Radio Equality Act to the Senate floor inspired this latest non-starter of an offer.
Such an offer is also part of a divide and conquer strategy -- webcasters big and small, interactive and non-interactivem have remained largely united in this fight. Now that the RIAA (through it's front group SoundExchange, through it's front group musicFIRST) is trying to extend this performance royalty fee to terrestrial radio, the coalition will grow in both size and power. I look forward to having the National Association of Broadcasters on our side in this battle.
Back to the "offer" at hand:
*SoundExchange insists on an annual revenue cap of $1.25 million to define "small webcaster." The revenue cap for over-the-air broadcasters to be considered a small business is $6.5 million -- why such a disparity? Why any disparity?
What this revenue cap effectively does is punish successful internet radio stations for being ...successful! If Webcaster A has revenues of $1,249,999.99 million, Webcaster A pays a percentage of that revenue to SoundExchange and stays in business. If Webcaster B earns $1 more than Webcaster A, the royalty rates increase to those set in the fatally flawed March 2, 2007 Copyright Royalty Board rate hike. Webcaster B would owe more in this one fee than was earned all year, which puts Webcaster B in debt and out of business. Damn that extra dollar earned.
This is SoundExchange insisting that webcasters accept a disincentive to grow as part of the deal.
*The SoundExchange offer only covers the music of its 20,000 members, not the hundreds of thousands of recording artists getting played on internet radio, so if webcasters play anything by anyone not on their member list, the bankruptcy-level Copyright Royalty Board rates come back into play.
*This settlement offer sunsets in 2010, at which time webcasters will have to go through all of this again and not be allowed to mention this deal as precedent when the RIAA once again attempts to gouge and ultimately control what gets played on internet radio.
Please, Congress: re-write the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or section 114 of copyright law, to update the misguided provisions written into law over a decade ago (which is forever in computer chronology -- most people didn't even have at-home access to the internet in 1998!).
Update (8/23): an interesting take on the motives for the recent SoundExchange smokescreen.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
SoundExchange In Possible Legal Trouble
SoundExchange is a non-profit organization created to collect royalties for artists whose music is played on internet and satellite radio. SoundExchange is not allowed to engage in lobbying.In an open letter to SoundExchange, entertainment lawyer Fred Wilhelms takes SoundExchange to task for attempting to extend its reach while not even being able to handle is current workload:
To be blunt, SoundExchange already has a job it promised to do. It isn't doing it well.This p2pnet piece, which includes the full text of Wilhelms' letter, is a must-read for those unsure of why SoundExchange is not to be trusted. Wilhelms asks SX where it got the authority to spend royalties collected on a lobbying front group called musicFIRST. musicFIRST, you'll recall, is the guise that SoundExchange Executive Director John Simson and others from SX wore at the terrestrial radio performance royalty hearing I attended last week.
"Reserving" tens of millions of dollars a year, then absorbing that money when you "can't find" the proper recipients is not doing a good job.
Setting a schedule for forfeitures of millions of dollars, and then not making any effort to publicize the forfeitures, is not doing a good job.
Being unable to explain how and why you rely on sampling to allocate royalties, and not even formally admitting you do, is not doing a good job.
Claiming that the amount of money you spend on something clearly outside the limited function you have been granted by law is "proprietary" information, is not only not doing a good job, it is a slap in the fact of the people you are supposed to work for.
Attacking the people who point out that you might be violating the law is not doing a good job.
Deducting the cost of violating the law from the money of your registered members, in open and direct contradiction to the law, is not doing a good job, no matter how many of your Directors approved.
Also, interesting reading from Eliot von Buskirk in WIRED and more coverage of the Senate co-sponsors' threat to bring The Internet Radio Equality Act to the floor if great strides are not made in negotiations this month.
Friday, August 03, 2007
"480 Minutes" 8/3/07 - Congress Says Get It Done!
It's August. For most of you that means warm weather and cold lemonade. For me that means it's cold and foggy here on the west side of San Francisco. Truth be told I much prefer this weather to what I experienced earlier in the week when I visited Washinton DC with some friends/colleagues from SomaFM and Reapandsow. It was hot and muggy, and each day during our short walk to the Hill I shvitzed like nobody's business. Fortunately the buildings were air conditioned...Thanks to much prep-work by Elise of SomaFM we had lots of meetings scheduled and informative printed materials to leave behind. We ran around from office to office explaining our side of the internet radio/copyright royalty issue. What piqued concerned interest again and again was that negotiations between SoundExchange and webcasters were not, as far as we knew, progressing. From some very smart and knowledgeable aides we learned a whole lot about the legislative process, the Interjet Radio Equality Act (as viewed by the Hill), and that our issue is sort of the tip of an iceberg. A massive confluence of copyright issues is coming to a head now.
We sat in on a hearing about extending the performance copyright royalty fee to terrestrial radio. All of the Representatives' opening statements assumed that this royalty rate would be extended to cover over-the-air readio. Rep. Darrell "Total Recall Election" Issa (R - CA.) said, "In my seven years in Congress, this is the first time that, in a no ifs, ands, or buts way, it's been made clear that the status quo will no longer be acceptable." The only witness called on behalf of radio was left to defend himself against the entire committee and four other witnesses. He was set-up as the piñata from the start. The debate was framed: big radio vs. artists. There was almost no mention of the big labels, who are behind this push and stand to reap at least 50% of the rewards.
The largely foreign-owned mega-conglomerates that own the major labels are not nearly as sympathetic figures as geriatric artists, hence their invisibility at the hearing.
Read more about the hearing here, here, or here. Also, check out the comments from my Wednesday blog post, including guest appearances by the wife/manager of Sam "Soul Man" Moore and a member of the board of SoundExchange.
Finally, in his blog, Wil Wheaton references and weighs in on Rusty from SomaFM's DC dispatches. Read what Rusty writes, that man is a wealth of information.
The best post-trip news thusfar is that U.S. Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), the Senate sponsors of the Internet Radio Equality Act, issued a press release saying they have become aware that little progress is being made in negotiations between SoundExchange and webcasters. The press release states,
If great progress toward a fair solution for webcasters is not made by Congress’s return to Washington after Labor Day, then we plan to take expeditious steps toward passage of the Internet Radio Equality Act. We feel the Senate must take action, and we will make every effort move the Internet Radio Equality Act to the floor.Now that's what I like to hear! (Strange bedfellows, I know, but you go to the Senate floor with the sponsors you have, I always say).
As many of you know, the next BAGeL Radio Presents... show is this Monday, August 6th at The Elbo Room featuring The Otherside, Bears, and Slings. I hope that you can make it out -- read about the bands below next to the flier for the show.
Please tune in to today's edition of "480 Minutes" which runs from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Pacific Time, and as always you can request songs:
e-mail: feedback@bagelradio.com
Yahoo IM: bagelradio
AOL/iChat: bagelradiolive
MSN Msgr: bagelradio@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: bagelradio@gmail.com
The music will not suck.
Upcoming Bay Area Gigs of Interest:
Marnie Stern/ Sholi/ Crime in Choir @ Bottom of the Hill 8/3
Lee Scratch Perry/ Dub is a Weapon @ Independent 8/4&5
Violent Femmes @ The Fillmore 8/4
The Otherside
Bears
Slings
@ Elbo Room 8/6
One of BAGeL Radio's favorite San Francisco bands, THE OTHERSIDE play psychedelic shoegaze. Imagine The Byrds smoking peyote with Ride and Interpol -- the contact high is worth the price of admission. Fans of Black Rebel Motorcycle Club and Stone Roses will love THE OTHERSIDE.
All the way from Cleveland OH. -- it's BEARS, in their first-ever San Francisco show! Fans of The Shins, Peter Bjorn & John, and Camera Obscura will love BEARS' catchy indie pop.
SLINGS, an OC via Gainsville FL. band, open the show with their Yo La Belle & Garfunkel Neutral Milk wash of campfire melodies backed with acoustic guitar, xylophone, melodica, and accordian sounds.
**HIJK (CD Release)/ The Invisible Cities/ Show Me State 8/9
*The Wombats @ Popscene 8/9
Squeeze @ The Mountain Winery 8/14
*Birdmonster @ Cafe du Nord 8/18
Earlimart/ String Dream Team @ Cafe du Nord 8/23
Psychic TV @ Independent 8/24
Beastie Boys @ The Warfield 8/24
Beastie Boys @ The Greek Theatre 8/25
Mickey Avalon @ Slim's 8/28
Gogol Bordello @ The Fillmore 8/29
Crowded House @ Mountain Winery 8/29
**Music For Animals/ Magic Bullets/ Dreamdate/ Transfer @ Great American Music Hall 9/1
Brian Jonestown Massacre/ Dimmer @ The Independent 9/3
*Okkervil River/ Damien Jurado @ The Independent 9/5
*Devendra Banhart @ Palace of Fine Arts 9/7
Wolf Parade/ Holy Fuck @ Great American Music Hall 9/12
Editors @ The Fillmore 9/20
The White Stripes/ Cold War Kids @ The Greek Theatre 9/21
Low @ Great American Music Hall 9/25 & 26
Bye Bye Blackbirds/ Statuesque @ Starry Plough 9/29
They Might Be Giants @ The Fillmore 9/30
Interpol @ Gill Graham Civic Auditorium 10/20
Of Montreal/ Grand Buffet/ MGMT @ Great American Music Hall 11/12
* = I'm there
** = I'm DJing
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
SoundExchange Negotiating In Bad Faith
As previously reported here, last Thursday the four mega-conglomerate major labels (under the pseudonym SoundExchange) agreed to allow webcasters to continue to pay royalties at the pre-CRB rates past the July 15th deadline if we continued to negotiate new rates in good faith. Just hours later the major labels started negotiating in bad faith by introducing an unreasonable post-agreement condition -- that webcasters invent and impose digital rights management (DRM) technology on our streams that will prevent stream-ripping (copying).It is impossible to negotiate an reasonable agreement when one side keeps moving the goal posts. Under these conditions the current efforts towards a settlement are pointless -- this is precisely why we need the Internet Radio Equality Act passed. We must fix the source of this problem, namely the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which opened up this copyright royalty loophole way back (1998) before anyone knew what internet radio would look like. Only then will webcasting be safe from the digilliterate dinosaurs whose idea of saving the movie industry was outlawing VCRs.
Besides the issue of bad faith negotiations, the major labels' DRM demand is a red herring, something that distracts attention from the real issue. For me and others I know, stream-ripping is used to time-shift programs. Like when people record a TV show on a VCR or DVR so it can be enjoyed some other time, people use stream-rippers to record their favorite internet radio shows like my (shameless plug!) award-winning "480 Minutes" program, Fridays, 9am - 5pm Pacific Time.
Copying internet radio is the a lot like copying FM radio in three main ways -- it is really easy to do, the resulting recording is lousy, and (with current technology) it is impossible to stop.
Wait! I have an idea! If the major labels can convince over-the-air radio to invest in and invent a way to prevent the recording of FM radio, webcasters will do the same for internet radio. Over-the-air radio has a 30+ year head start on us, and that still sounds fair.
Jokes aside, if anyone is willing to build a music library by copying my 64kbps stream (CDs are 320kbps) well, those few folks weren't ever going to fork over $18.98 for the new White Stripes CD, anyway. Keep in mind too that, like those mixed tapes I used to make from WLIR by leaving the record and pause buttons pressed on my boom box in the 80s, these recordings will include cross-fades between songs, public service announcements, and DJs yapping over top of them.
Despite the major labels' efforts to pin fault for their failing business model on webcasters, it is apparent to just about everyone (inluding the promotions departments at the major labels!) that airplay on internet radio promotes artists. If not us, then who could be responsible for the decline in sales? Perhaps CD sticker-shock all these years later has something to do with declining sales. Had the majors not colluded to price-fix CDs throughout the 1990s when music sales and profits were through the roof, maybe people would feel more guilty about stealing music from them? Sounds plausible.
Read the DiMA reaction to this latest major label sidestep, and check out how quickly things can turn ugly.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Still Streaming, Still On Death Row
The July 15th due date for collection of the new crippling copyright royalty rates has come and gone. SoundExchange has promised not to collect these fees for an unspecified period while a fair rate is negotiated. The public statements from SoundExchange (aka the RIAA, aka the major labels) spokespeople have been inconsistent and sometimes contradictory, which is worrisome from an organization we hope is negotiating in good faith. The fact that late last week the subject of imposing Digital Rights Management restrictions on streaming media suddenly became part of the SoundExchange demands is troubling, to say the least.While hundreds of stations have decided to go dark, BAGeL Radio and many other webcasters (including our good friends SomaFM, Pandora, AccuRadio, and
Live365) have decided to continue broadcasting through this precarious period. Personally, I feel like we are still looking down the barrel of a gun -- at any moment negotiations could break down and that gun could go off.Short term and disparate deals may seem attractive because the industry has been placed into such peril, but such deals will only leave us back in this very same situation before long. Check out this article about copyright royalty rates from five years ago -- it reads much like recent news articles on the subject. No one wants to go through this again in another 18 months, or even 5 years -- who wants to invest their time (and money) in a venture standing on such uncertain footing? We need a more permanent solution.
Thanks in large part to the SaveNetRadio coalition we have made great progress in educating government officials, artists, the mainstream media, and listeners about this issue. Most people now realize that if the RIAA gets its way, the vast majority of artists ("dead webcasters pay no royalties"), listeners (vast decrease in stations to choose from), and (obviously) webcasters all lose. This now common knowledge, reflected in the media coverage and in the outpouring of support from internet radio listeners, has given our side great momentum.
We will use this momentum to continue our fight to pass the Internet Radio Equality Act (HR 2060). SoundExchange may continue to cloud the issue with smokescreens (CD sales are down, it must be internet radio's fault) and falsehoods (webcasters make money from music but don't pay royalties), and we will remain vigilant in challenging and exposing these misleading statements. Only when it is protected by law will internet radio be safe from the huge corporations which already control so much of the music industry and seek to dominate the rest.
We're still streaming. Thanks for listening.
Update: Read another take on the current situation.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
SoundExchange Goals Hurt Artists and Most Labels
Kurt Hanson of RAIN reasons that the actual goal of SoundExchange, which represents/ fronts for the RIAA, which represents/ fronts for the four major labels (EMI, Warner, Sony-BMG, and 
Universal), is bad for most artists and lables. If their current strategy of hiking statutory licenses to bankruptcy levels takes root, radio of all shapes and sizes will be forced to cut direct deals with the labels. This will (a) cut the artists out of their share of monies collected, (b) give the major labels say over which stations can and cannot stay on the air, and (c) create a "reverse payola" situation by offerring certain of their artists to stations "royalty free" if the stations agree to play the labels' prirority records.
Read all about it in Kurt's excellent essay on the subject.
Universal), is bad for most artists and lables. If their current strategy of hiking statutory licenses to bankruptcy levels takes root, radio of all shapes and sizes will be forced to cut direct deals with the labels. This will (a) cut the artists out of their share of monies collected, (b) give the major labels say over which stations can and cannot stay on the air, and (c) create a "reverse payola" situation by offerring certain of their artists to stations "royalty free" if the stations agree to play the labels' prirority records.Read all about it in Kurt's excellent essay on the subject.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Day of Silence Press Coverage
Internet radio stations to protest royalty hikes
Web Radio's 'Day of Silence' Protests Royalty Increases
Los Angeles Times - 12 hours ago
WASHINGTON — Across the Internet, the music will die today.
Web Radio's 'Day of Silence' Protests Royalty Increases
FOX News - 2 hours ago
NEW YORK — Web radio broadcasters across the United States were preparing for a 'Day of Silence' on June 26 to protest the US government's plans to boost ...
Business 2.0, CA - 5 hours ago New licensing fees could doom Internet radio, but webcasters are fighting back with a 'Day of Silence.' Business 2.0's Chris Taylor investigates. ... |
Washington Post, United States - 7 hours ago By Mike Musgrove No, music fans, there isn'ta problem with your Web connection -- it's just that many Internet radio stations are deliberately offline today ... |
Malaysia Star, Malaysia - 19 hours ago NEW YORK (AP) - Dozens of online music broadcasters will go silent on Tuesday to protest a new set of royalty rates that many smaller companies say would ... |
The Age, Australia - 20 hours ago Dozens of online music broadcasters will go silent on Tuesday to protest a new set of royalty rates that many smaller companies say would put them out of ... |
Forbes, NY - 20 hours ago AP 06.25.07, 5:50 PM ET Dozens of online music broadcasters will go silent on Tuesday to protest a new set of royalty rates that many smaller companies say ... |
Information Week Weblog, NY - 30 minutes ago The intent of the protest is to demonstrate what will be heard on July 17th, the date that 17 months of retroactive royalty payments are due. ... |
CIO Today, CA - 1 hour ago By Jennifer LeClaire Internet-only webcasters and broadcasters that simulcast online are protesting royalty hikes in a "Day of Silence," alerting their ... |
Top40-Charts.com, NY - 2 hours ago WASHINGTON, DC (Top40 Charts/ SaveNetRadio) - The regularly scheduled programming of millions of Internet radio listeners will be temporarily interrupted ... |
CIO Today, CA - 3 hours ago By Hiawatha Bray The Digital Music Association, which represents Internet broadcasters, has asked a federal court to suspend the Internet radio royalty fee ... |
Manila Times, Philippines - 4 hours ago Internet radio listeners will tune in to the sound of silence on Tuesday as webcasters protest a sharp rise in royalty fees that critics say will force ... |
PopMatters, IL - 6 hours ago by Brad Kava SAN JOSE, Calif.—When 29 million music listeners turn to their favorite Internet radio stations Tuesday, many will be greeted with the sound of ... |
PhysOrg.com, VA - 9 hours ago A man listens to the radio on his computer. US Internet radio listeners will tune in to the sound of silence on Tuesday as webcasters protest a sharp rise ... |
Middle East Times, Egypt - 11 hours ago LOS ANGELES, CA, USA -- US Internet radio listeners will tune in to the sound of silence Tuesday as Webcasters protest a sharp rise in royalty fees that ... |
calendarlive.com, CA - 12 hours ago By Jim Puzzanghera, Times Staff Writer It's a protest staged by online radio stations to preview what they say will happen when substantially higher royalty ... |
Deseret News, UT - 12 hours ago AP NEW YORK — Dozens of online music broadcasters will go silent today to protest a new set of royalty rates that many smaller companies say would put them ... |
6abc.com, PA - 17 hours ago NEW YORK (AP) - June 25, 2007 - Dozens of online music broadcasters will go silent on Tuesday to protest a new set of royalty rates that many smaller ... |
ABC News - 1 hour ago Artists wail against royalty fee increases for Web broadcasters who offer a rare promotional service for independent musicians. ... |
San Jose Mercury News, USA - 1 hour ago By Brad Kava When 29 million music listeners turn to their favorite Internet radio stations today, many will be greeted with the sound of silence - but not ... |
Macworld, CA - 2 hours ago By Christopher Breen If you’re accustomed to listening to streaming Internet radio or streaming music services such as Pandora, you may be surprised to ... |
Wired News - 3 hours ago By Eliot Van Buskirk June 26, 2007 | 10:39:49 AMCategories: Save Net Radio With all the lead-up to today's "Day of Silence" for webcasters in protest of the ... |
Salt Lake Tribune, United States - 4 hours ago AP Posted: 8:54 AM- LOGAN - Utah Public Radio will shut down regular programming on its Web stream to protest music royalties for Internet radio. ... |
InformationWeek, NY - 4 hours ago Since a bunch of badly-disguised radicals trespassed on a merchant ship and tossed some of its cargo into the waters of Boston Harbor, people have come up ... |
Washington Post, United States - 6 hours ago If you listen to music, news or other programming via the Internet, you're likely to find a soundstream of silence today. The Day of Silence is a one-day ... |
BBC News, UK - 8 hours ago Web radio broadcasters across the US will hold a "day of silence" on Tuesday in protest at plans to hike royalty payments when music is played online. ... |
San Francisco Chronicle, USA - 8 hours ago Internet radio DJs are replacing their eclectic playlists with a "Day of Silence" today, a protest against new royalty rates they say could decimate the ... |
San Diego Union Tribune, United States - 9 hours ago Thousands of Internet radio stations will stop the music today for the National Day of Silence, a nationwide protest of an impending increase in royalty ... |
Hartford Courant, United States - 11 hours ago By JANICE PODSADA, Courant Staff Writer Charles R. St. James is one of thousands of people who operate an Internet radio station. At any given time, ... |
Boston Globe, United States - 11 hours ago By Seth Kroll | June 26, 2007 FAMILY JUNCTION is a band made up of five childhood friends. We decided that, after college, we were going to take on the ... |
Globe and Mail, Canada - 22 hours ago To paraphrase a well-used joke: if an Internet radio station falls in cyberspace, does anybody here it? That's the question many online radio listeners ... |
|
South Asian Women's Forum, India - 22 hours ago LOS ANGELES (AFP) - The SaveNetRadio Coalition said thousands of web-based broadcasters would participate in the "National Day of Silence", ... |
MP3.com - Jun 25, 2007 By Jim Welte - MP3.com Webcasters to protest recent hike in the royalty rates they pay to play music on their sites; most majors on board except for Last.fm ... |
CNBC, NJ - Jun 25, 2007 Network ad prices are up despite a ratings slide. CNBC's Julia Boorstin has the story. National Day Of Silence: Will Internet Radio Be Heard? ... |
Spin, NY - Jun 25, 2007 Attention web radio listeners! Tomorrow (June 26), thousands of webcasters will go silent or air intermittent public service announcements in an effort to ... |
CNBC, NJ - Jun 25, 2007 By CNBC.com | 25 Jun 2007 | 10:59 AM ET Some fans of Internet radio may click on their favorite Web site and hear nothing but silence on Tuesday. ... |
Louisville Courier-Journal, KY - Jun 25, 2007 Listeners who log onto to WFPK 91.9-FM or WUOL 90.5-FM Internet streaming radio tomorrow between 9 am and 5 pm will hear the sound of silence. ... |
Cleveland Plain Dealer, OH - Jun 25, 2007 Internet radio listeners will hear SOS -- sounds of silence -- from their computers and cell phones on Tuesday, when Webcasters plan to stop the music as a ... |
FindLaw, CA - Jun 25, 2007 By CECILY MAK This Tuesday, June 26, is a "day of silence" on which webcasters will protest the hike in Internet radio royalty rates, scheduled to become ... |
iT News, Australia - Jun 24, 2007 By Clement James, 25 June 2007 15:47 AEST Internet, Government/Law Thousands of US webcasters will go silent on 26 June in a bid to draw attention to ... |
Radio Javan, GA - Jun 24, 2007 On Tuesday, June 26th, Radio Javan will be participating in Internet radio's Day Of Silence. The future of Internet radio is in immediate danger and ... |
Spacelab, MN - Jun 24, 2007 In the ongoing struggle between web radio broadcasters and the Copyright Royalty Board's proposed rate fees, a new development has emerged to show ... |
MP3 Newswire, NJ - Jun 24, 2007
By Richard Menta 6/24/07 It took me less than 10 minutes to post my own Net radio station, a station that unlike terrestrial radio has a worldwide reach. ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)