Save Internet Radio

[ScottK]

There is move out for review by the Copyright Royaly Board that will seriously raise royalty rates that free internet radio stations have to pay per song. I'm a fan of Pandora and it seems that if such legislation passes Pandora, and others, will be driven off the net.

Here's an automated letter that will be sent to your representative and senators.

http://capwiz.com/saveinternetradio/issues/alert/?alertid=9631541

The automatic letter reads

As a fan of Internet radio, I was alarmed to learn that the Copyright Royalty Board has decided to raise music royalty rates by 300 to 1200 percent. For most webcasters the new royalties exceed their revenue and they simply will go bankrupt and stop webcasting.

The silencing of Internet radio would be a blow to listeners like me who enjoy the wide variety of choices only available via Internet radio. This will kill the great diversity of music that I hear over the Internet and all the independent artists who have a difficult time breaking through on other forms of radio.

I respectfully request that Congress look into this matter and take action to prevent it. Please understand that time is of the essence since the new royalty rates are retroactive to January 1, 2006 so they will cause immediate bankruptcies if they become effective for even one day. Please don’t let the music die.

 

[Benjamin28]

I had participated in this petition as well. I find it quite ridiculous that the costs for internet radio should be so disproportionate as compared to other mediums. I for one, really enjoy Pandora as it is an excellent tool for broadening your exposure to musicians that fit your tastes, genre. It would be a shame to let this happen.

For those of you who still listen to common "radio", consider checking internet radio, there are a great many benefits and it truly would be a shame to allow them to essentially be financially kicked between the pockets.

 

[Craig H.]

I live between a few major markets, with 2 local stations that are generally not to my liking. In the FCC's infinite wisdom (HA!) there are a few stations from the major markets that overlap. One frequency, 93.1, has news and talk out of Augusta, and (c)rap out of Savannah. There have been times when Rush and some gangster rappers have had interesting "conversations" while riding in my car.

My point is that the internet is free of such nonsense, at least for now. To see the royalty rascals kill it would be a shame, not to mention counterproductive (for them) in the long run.

 

[ScottK]

I live between a few major markets, with 2 local stations that are generally not to my liking. In the FCC's infinite wisdom (HA!) there are a few stations from the major markets that overlap. One frequency, 93.1, has news and talk out of Augusta, and (c)rap out of Savannah. There have been times when Rush and some gangster rappers have had interesting "conversations" while riding in my car.

My point is that the internet is free of such nonsense, at least for now. To see the royalty rascals kill it would be a shame, not to mention counterproductive (for them) in the long run.

I get all the NYC stations. And XM. And they all stink.

 

[Jim Wynne]

This is a really complicated issue. For example, have a look here to see how royalty payments are calculated. As a matter of balance, you can also look here, at the website of Sound Exchange, which is responsible for collecting and distributing royalties from Internet music providers.

Unless you have a pretty good understanding of the issues involved (one that goes beyond "I want my Internet radio") you should be careful about sending letters to legislators. This is another instance of technology advancing faster than legislation can keep up with it, and if you look at some of the files linked to on the Sound Exchange site, you'll see that this decision was not the result of someone's greedy whim, but rather a fairly comprehensive process in which everyone got a fair hearing.

 

[ScottK]

This is a really complicated issue. For example, have a look here to see how royalty payments are calculated. As a matter of balance, you can also look here, at the website of Sound Exchange, which is responsible for collecting and distributing royalties from Internet music providers.

Unless you have a pretty good understanding of the issues involved (one that goes beyond "I want my Internet radio") you should be careful about sending letters to legislators. This is another instance of technology advancing faster than legislation can keep up with it, and if you look at some of the files linked to on the Sound Exchange site, you'll see that this decision was not the result of someone's greedy whim, but rather a fairly comprehensive process in which everyone got a fair hearing.

SoundExchange was originally formed by RIAA.
They may be separate organizations now but I'm certain RIAA is still pulling the strings.

Web casting is really the only forum for getting the music I most enjoy (punk, industrial, and heavy metal). XM and Sirius make a stab at it but don't cut it. "Terrestrial Radio" doesn't even try.
For hearing new matierial and being exposed to new stuff web stations are my only option and this scheme is punishing to them.

 

[Jim Wynne]

For hearing new matierial and being exposed to new stuff web stations are my only option and this scheme is punishing to them.

If I understand all of this correctly, web stations aren't being "punished"; they're only being required to pay the same royalties everyone else does. Why should web stations get special treatment? (Think of this from the point of view of the copyright owners.)

 

[Scott Catron]

If I understand all of this correctly, web stations aren't being "punished"; they're only being required to pay the same royalties everyone else does. Why should web stations get special treatment? (Think of this from the point of view of the copyright owners.)

Because it's a different distribution channel with different hurdles? Maybe, by the nature of web stations, they can't attract revenue like mainstream stations. Why not give them a break?

Would copyright holders prefer that nobody is exposed to their product?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Because it's a different distribution channel with different hurdles? Maybe, by the nature of web stations, they can't attract revenue like mainstream stations. Why not give them a break?

Would copyright holders prefer that nobody is exposed to their product?

I have a lot of problems with the way that this stuff has been handled, especially the DRM business, but I'm sure that there are lots of small-market broadcast stations that also have "different hurdles," and Internet stations are setting themselves up as competition, or at least alternatives, to broadcast stations, so I don't see how a level playing field can be considered "punishment."

 

[ScottK]

If I understand all of this correctly, web stations aren't being "punished"; they're only being required to pay the same royalties everyone else does. Why should web stations get special treatment? (Think of this from the point of view of the copyright owners.)

I didn't say it's punishing them... it's punishing to them.

webcast advertising dollars for small operators like Pandora are a lot less than broadcast.