|
Save Internet Radio
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Chris Allen |
As a very frequent member of the online music scene and internet radio scene, I am quite bothered and concerned by the recent developments in licensing put forth by the RIAA and SoundExchange in the USA. By the looks of it, this could be quite a blow to the internet radio scene as we know it today.
I have included an article from Save Internet Radio. Please read it and pass it along to your friends to promote awareness amongst the community.
| quote: | If the RIAA and SoundExchange get their way, independent webcasting / Internet radio will soon cease to exist.
Why? Earlier today, the Copyright Royalty Board, the group overseeing statutory licensing for US-based internet radio stations, announced the new royalty rates for streaming radio performance rights. The board rejected the arguments made by webcasters and instead chose to adopt the proposal put forth by industry-backed SoundExchange, a royalty fee collection agency created by the RIAA.
The new rates are based on “performances” of songs. A “performance” is defined as one song being streamed to a single listener. In other words, a station with 1000 listeners is charged for 1000 performances of each song it broadcasts.
Further, the new rates, just announced today, are retroactive to 2006, and increase rapidly each year. The rates per performance are as follows:
$0.0008 in 2006
$0.0011 in 2007
$0.0014 in 2008
$0.0018 in 2009
At first glance, those seem like fairly small numbers: eight ten-thousandths of a dollar, eleven ten-thousandths of a dollar, and so on. When you actually do the math, however, you see the truth revealed. The average radio station plays 16 songs in an hour. Under this system, that would be equivalent to 16 performances.
0.0011 x 16 = 0.0176
Still a fairly small number - under two cents. But now assume this station has 1000 listeners. That means that, in one hour, the station would be billed for 16,000 performances.
0.0011 x 16000 = 17.60
That’s $17.60 an hour. Now we’re starting to see how expensive this truly is. Multiply that by 24 hours a day.
17.60 * 24 = 422.40
$422.40 a day. But there’s 365 days in a year.
422.40 * 365 = 154176
$154,176 for the year in performance royalties alone for a station with 1000 listeners. And that’s just for 2007: it gets even worse. In 2008, the cost rises to $193,536 for the year. In 2009, it goes up to $248,832. Even for a much smaller station, the royalties owed are huge.
Of course, these figures don’t include the other set of rights that Internet radio stations are required to purchase, which must be licensed separately from an agency like SESAC or ASCAP, or the cost of bandwidth and server capacity. When you add all these costs together, you can easily see why nobody, save perhaps a megacorporation like AOL or Yahoo, could afford to pay these rates.
But wait - what’s this? The new rates apply retroactively to the beginning of 2006. In other words, someone who has been happily (and legally) running their small internet radio station for the past few years is suddenly going to be hit with possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional royalties owed. These bills could easily cause a small, independent broadcaster (and his family) to go bankrupt.
Meanwhile, over-the-air radio stations are still not required to pay one dime to the record industry for public performance rights from SoundExchange or an equivalent group. They only need to pay the far more reasonable fees of BMI, ASCAP, and/or SESAC. This reads like another tactic by the recording industry and corporate powers to exert control over anyone involved with music and an attempt to destroy independent broadcasting.
Whether you don’t want to see your favorite internet radio station go off the air, whether you just hate the RIAA, whatever the reason: please, help us get this senseless, greedy policy designed to do nothing but line the pockets of the record industry overturned. Write to, or better yet call, your representative, your senators, and the Copyright Royalty Board. Tell your friends and family, write on your blog, digg this - help get the word out and help to Save Internet Radio!
If you are a webcaster, we want to hear from you! How will this affect your station? What do you plan on doing? Drop us a line at [email protected]. If you’re someone involved with setting these rates, you’re also welcome to contact us and explain why you think these rates are fair.
We’ll be updating this site with more information as this progresses, so please check back and get involved! |
View: Full story courtesy of Save Internet Radio
Digg This Story: Here |
|
|
| Tordan |
some good news regarding net radio licensing fees.
| quote: |
Internet Radio Equality Act would overturn decision on webcasting fees
By Nate Anderson | Published: April 27, 2007 - 01:00PM CT
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) has waded right into the debate over Internet broadcasting, introducing a bill that would overturn the recent ruling requiring webcasters to pay a flat rate per song streamed, rather than the traditional percentage of their profits.
The Copyright Royalty Board recently raised rates on Internet webcasters, who will soon face greatly-increased fees for streaming music on their stations. The issue affected not just Internet broadcasters but noncommercial groups like NPR, and the broadcasters filed an appeal of the decision earlier this month, but were denied.
Inslee's bill, the Internet Radio Equality Act, would toss out the Board's decision and return the webcasting industry to a percentage of profits model. In this case, the percentage would be set at the same rate paid by satellite radio, which is 7.5 percent of revenue.
The bill is a huge victory for groups like the SaveNetRadio coalition. Jake Ward of SaveNetRadio called the new bill a "critical step to preserve this vibrant and growing medium, and to develop a truly level playing field where webcasters can compete with satellite radio."
SoundExchange, the company that collects and distributes these royalty payments, has consistently praised the Copyright Royalty Board for raising the rates, but has recently embarked on a bit of fence-mending with webcasters. "Our continued outreach reflects our long-standing position that these are two businesses—webcasting and creating music—that are joined at the hip and that need each other," said John Simson, Executive Director of SoundExchange. "We recognize that there may be certain needs and expectations, as expressed by webcasters in recent days, that might possibly be addressed through direct discussions." SoundExchange has begun talking with several of the organizations involved in the debate, but continues to believe that the Board's new royalty policy is "fair and reasonable."
The National Association of Broadcasters, on the other hand, is cautiously optimistic that a legislative solution to the issue can be found. Calling the Board's initial decision "disappointing," NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton went on to say in a statement that his group is "reviewing details of Rep. Inslee's bill" and that the NAB will "work with Congress to craft a solution that helps ensure the survival of a fledgling audio platform."
With the new royalty rates set to go into effect in the middle of May, groups that oppose the new rates don't have much time left to act.
|
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...sting-fees.html |
|
|
| Porky |
it never fails to amaze me how greedy the RIAA can get. it's like they're scrounging for cash, panicking by trying to enforce their will on others, much like how they've been suing individual users with lawsuits for downloading mp3s.
their system will never work, there are always ways to circumvent the system, much like how piratebay moved their servers to sweden. |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
it's all about control .. which they're not used to not having
|
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
| I'm calling cockadoody on this! :whip: :mad: |
|
|
| Stilez |
Here's a video to explain to those who aren't quite up for the long read.
Sounds like a horrible future for online radio in N.America
CLICK HER FOR VIDEO |
|
|
|
|
