I don't know how many of you have tried to listen to internet radio feeds today but many of them are silent in protest of new proposed fees internet radio broadcasters would have to pay if the RIAA gets its way. The RIAA met behind closed doors with members of a US Copyright advisory panel to encourage them to increase rates to internet broadcasters. Understand that these broadcasters already pay the same royalty fees that regular radio stations pay. The reason the RIAA wants to charge more is because they have no control over the smaller, independant stations like they do with giant mega-media companies like Clear Channel Communications who owns over 300 stations nationally (more than 200 more than any of its competitors). The new charges would effectively bankrupt a large percentage of the internet broadcasters destroying choices available to us online. I regularly listen to jazz and classical feeds from Live365.com and this would suck. Visit http://www.saveinternetradio.org/ for more information.
I hate the RIAA. I worked in the legal department of a portal and had to deal with them and their equivalent in Germany. Very annoying. Just trying to protect their old monopolies and privileges.
Yeah, i was listening to some radio station on the way to work in the austin area today, and the DJ's were talking about the protest. They were claiming that the suit (or whatever you would like to call it) was seeking $21 per hour of internet radio broadcast since 1998. Let's see...21 dollars times 24 hours times 365 days times 4 years.....carry the one....that's HUNDREDS of dollars being swindled from the smaller radion stations! Seriously, it doesn't seem right....But we'll see what happens.
Here are the rates that are to be set: <i>The Librarian of Congress is required to set "sound recordings performance royalty" rates for Internet radio stations by May 21st — and an arbitration panel working for that office has recommended a rate of $.0014 per listener per song (or $.0007 for broadcast simulcasts). Many webcasters say the proposed royalty rate is the equivalent of 200% or more of their revenues.</i> Thing is that they already pay royalties but not per listener per song. Radio stations on the internet and via the airwaves are subject to the same royalty rates, yet radio broadcasters would not have to pay the same rates because there is no way to determine how many listeners tune in to them. By the way, if you want info on the monopolization of radio in America, check out http://www.pbs.org/now/indepth/042602_media.html . Bill Moyers did a terrific story on the consolidation of media in America. A few stats: Approximate number of daily newspapers in North America: 1800 Approximate number of magazines in North America: 11,000 Approximate number of radio stations in North America: 11,000 Approximate number of television stations in North America: 2000 Approximate number of book publishers in North America: 3000 Number of companies owning a controlling interest in the media listed above in 1984: 50 Number of companies owning a controlling interest in the media listed above in 1987: 26 Number of companies owning a controlling interest in the media listed above in 1996: 10 <b>Number of companies owning a controlling interest in the media listed above in 2002: 6</b> From 50 to 6 in less than 20 years. So much for capitalism and competition. In addition, cable television rates have RISEN to 4 times the amount they were prior to deregulation.
Wouldn't traditional radio stations broadcasting their feeds over the Intenet also be subject to these royalties? That's pretty ridiculous...most if not all of these stations are broadcasting their commercials, too...what's the difference? Many of them stopped their feeds nearly a year ago in order to avoid problems with the RIAA... The government has ruthlessly gone after Microsoft in the last few years, and portrayed them to be villains....how exactly is the RIAA any different? They're worse...
Interestingly enough, two of those Big Six are not even American companies: BMG (Germany) and Sony (Japan).
You are right, but it isn't just the RIAA that is the problem. Remember that the RIAA is owned by the same companies (Sony, Universal, Time/Warner, BMG, etc) that own the majority of broadcast and print media outlets. As a result, they are choking the market for independant broadcasters because they get all the advertising. They also own concert promotions and outdoor advertising allowing them to monopolize the market at a much lower cost to themselves. They out-bid local promoters (since Clear Channel now owns Pace Concerts) at very high rates and then increase the ticket prices. They just pass on the higher costs to consumers. One promoter in Dever was discussing this on Moyers' show and said that he bid $100,000 for a Bonnie Raitt show and his bid included $30 ticket prices. Clear Channel/Pace bid $250,000 and ended up charging $45 per ticket. Of course, their advertising and marketing budgets are smaller because they own the radio stations and outdoor advertising so they don't have to pay for promotion. In essence, they make more profit by having lower expenses (despite the high bid) AND charging higher prices for the tickets. What worries me most is the loss of diverse voices in media. I have quite a few friends who work in local media and the ad departments are always pressuring the editorial departments to run positive stories on advertisers. When a particularly negative story is set to come out about a big advertising customer, stories are often sqashed to protect ad revenues, particularly in the print media which is struggling to survive. The reason this is bad is because we have no dissenting or critical voices. They are becoming distilled down to something that really isn't news but is more akin to PR. Ever notice how many local news stories are little more than PR for local advertisers? It happens all the time. Any good businessperson will tell you that ad budgets don't just help you get customers through ads but it helps get you PR in the local media which is MORE valuable than the ads they buy because it SEEMS objective even when it rarely is. A good example of the loss of dissenting voices was when CNBC signed the contract to broadcast on Time/Warner cable systems. They agreed not to broadcast news more that a certain number of hours every day. Instead, they were required to feature a more open news format with commentary, magazine shows and interviews. Why? Well, Time/Warner owns CNN and they didn't want the competition. Scary.
As I've so often mentioned, <b>I HATE THE RIAA</b> . . . but I can't really add anything to your excellent posts Jeff. The RIAA is the WORST coporate entity out there. As we've seen time and time again, their entire operation is one governed only by greed. Rather than actually caring about its customers, the RIAA treats the customer like the enemy, and then asks for more and more money, while looking to protect its cushy business model with bad legislation bought with campaign dollars. The thing is, you won't hear negative comments on the radio, or in media outlets because they are owned by the same people who make up the RIAA. Next up, the MPAA . . .
Ever listen to JazzFM??? I listen to that pretty frequently at work. I really hope they don't start charging for it!
www.house.gov www.senate.gov They have email forms when you find who you want to contact. www.saveinternetradio.com has 3 form letters. I used the short one and then added some of my own thoughts on the subject. There is no reason other than extreme greed that non-profit, non-mainstream, non-RIAA competetive, student radio should be suffering from this proposal. Student radio is about new people who have hopes of making it big or just musicians who love music and don't care about selling out. Kim aka DJ Nocturnal kanm.tamu.edu
Thanks for posting that, Kam. Vengence: I think this goes well beyond the RIAA. I mean this extends out to every form of media out there because these are the same companies: newspapers, magazines, radio stations, tv stations, broadcast networks, movie makers, movie theaters, record companies, publishing companies, cable networks, concert promoters, outdoor advertisers (billboards), internet providers, record stores, video rental outlets Essentially, every major distributor of information in the US is owned and operated by no more than 6 companies. Let's just take Time/Warner/AOL for example. Here is what they own or have at least a sizable degree of interest in: <b>Online Services </b> <blockquote>America Online CompuServe Interactive Services Digital City ICQ The Knot, Inc. - (tons of wedding stuff on QVC) MapQuest.com Spinner.com Winamp DrKoop.com - former surgeon general Legend (49% - Internet service in China)</blockquote> <b>Other Internet</b> <blockquote>Netscape Communications iAmaze Amazon.com Quack.com Streetmail Switchboard</blockquote> <b>Joint ventures/Partnerships (with these companies):</b> <blockquote>Hughes Electronics Corp. 3Com eBay Eastman Kodak Co. General Motors VarsityBooks.com Hewlett-Packard PurchasePro.com VeriSign Inc. Citigroup Ticketmaster Inc. Movietickets.com Homestore Infospace American Greetings</blockquote> <b>Books/Publishing</b> <blockquote>Time Life Books Book-of-the-Month Club Paperback Book Club Children's Book-of-the-Month Club History Book Club Money Book Club HomeStyle Books Crafter's Choice One Spirit (spiritual book club) International Little, Brown and Company Bulfinch Press Back Bay Books Little, Brown and Company (U.K.) Warner Books Warner Vision The Mysterious Press Warner Aspect Warner Treasures Oxmoor House Leisure Arts Sunset Books TW Kids Leisure Arts</blockquote> <b>Cable/DBS</b> <blockquote>HBO (including HBO's all over the world) Cinemax Time Warner Sports Comedy Central Court TV Time Warner Cable Road Runner Time Warner Communications (telephone service) New York City Cable Group (largest cable cluster in world - over 1.1 million) New York 1 News (24 hour news channel devoted only to NYC) Time Warner Home Theater (Pay-Per-View) Time Warner Security (residential and commercial security monitoring) Kablevision (53.75% - cable television in Hungary) In Demand</blockquote> <b>Film & TV Production/Distribution</b> <blockquote>Warner Bros. Studios and Television Production The WB Television Network Warner Bros. Television Animation Hanna - Barbera Cartoons Telepictures Production Witt - Thomas Productions Castle Rock Entertainment Warner Home Video The Warner Channel (Latin America, Asia - Pacific, Australia, Germ.) Warner Bros. International Theaters (owns/operates multiplex theaters in over 12 countries)</blockquote> <b>Magazines</b> <blockquote>Time Time Money Time For Kids Fortune Business 2.0 Life Sports Illustrated (for women, for kids, etc) Inside Stuff Money People Who Weekly People en Espa–ol Teen People Entertainment Weekly EW Metro The Ticket In Style Southern Living Progressive Farmer Southern Accents Cooking Light The Parent Group Parenting Baby Talk Baby on the Way This Old House Sunset Sunset Garden Guide Health Hippocrates Coastal Living Weight Watchers Real Simple Asiaweek President (Japanese business monthly) Dancyu (Japanese cooking) Wallpaper (U.K.) Field & Stream Freeze Golf Magazine Outdoor Life Popular Science Salt Water Sportsman Ski Skiing Magazine Skiing Trade News SNAP Snowboard Life Ride BMX Today's Homeowner TransWorld Skateboarding TransWorld Snowboarding Verge Yachting Magazine Warp American Express Publishing Corporation Travel & Leisure Food & Wine Departures SkyGuide DC Comics Vertigo Paradox Milestone Mad Magazine</blockquote> <b>Music/Record Labels</b> <blockquote>The Atlantic Group Big Beat Blackground Breaking Igloo Lava Mesa/Bluemoon Modern 1 43 Rhino Records Elektra Entertainment Group EastWest Asylum Elektra/Sire Warner Brothers Records Reprise American Recordings Giant Maverick Revolution Qwest WEA Telegram Coalition CGD East West China Continential DRO East West Erato Fazer Finlandia Magneoton MCM Nonesuch Teldec Warner/Chappell Music (publishing company) WEA Inc. (sales, distribution and manufacturing) Ivy Hill Corporation (printing and packaging) Warner Special Products</blockquote> <b>Music Joint Ventures</b> <blockquote>Columbia House Music Sound Exchange Music Choice and Music Choice Europe Viva (German music video channel) Channel V Heartland Music (50% - direct order of country and gospel music) MusicNet</blockquote> <b>Theme Parks</b> <blockquote>Warner Brothers Recreation Enterprises (owns/operates international theme parks)</blockquote> <b>Entertainment Networks </b> <blockquote>TBS Superstation Turner Network Television (TNT) Turner South Cartoon Network Turner Classic Movies</blockquote> <b>Film Production</b> <blockquote>New Line Cinema Fine Line Features Turner Original Productions</blockquote> <b>Sports Teams/Etc</b> <blockquote>Atlanta Braves Atlanta Hawks Atlanta Thrashers Turner Sports Good Will Games Philips Arena</blockquote> <b>Educational</b> (maybe the scariest to me) <blockquote>Turner Learning CNN Newsroom (daily news program for classrooms) Turner Adventure Learning (electronic field trips for schools)</blockquote> <b>Satellite/Networks</b> <blockquote>Turner Home Satellite Turner Network Sales</blockquote> Can someone say...conflict of interest!!!???
I saw an interview with one of these RIAA storm troopers and he had the nerve to say they were doing this in order to get fair compensation for artists which is funny considering how unfairly they compensate the same artists.
