smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | rob@splitsville.com |
| Subject | =?US-ASCII?B?UkU6IFJlOiBJbnRlcm5ldCBSYWRpbyBTaWxlbmNl?= |
| Date | Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:35:30 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (2.8 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
>>Satellite
>>radio and webcasters pay performance fees, but
terrestrial radio only pays composer fees.
How does that work, exactly? Does that mean for all those millions of times 'Every Breath You Take' was on the radio, Sting got paid, and Copeland and Summers got nothing?
Yikes
>----- ------- Original Message ------- -----
>From: :audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org
>Sent: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 -0700 (PDT) 12:11:52
>
>Jamie writes:
>
>And pinning all this animosity on the evil RIAA is
>only half the issue. The lobbyists for the
>legislation
>against webcasters was instigated by TERRESTRIAL
>radio
>who were crying into their beer that they had to
>pay
>performance royalties for broadcasting while
>webcasters did not. If you're going to blame
>people,
>make sure the guns are pointed at all the
>culprits....not just the RIAA.
>
>Shawn says:
>
>I just wanted to point out that this is an
>inaccurate
>statement. While some terrestrial radio is hostile
>to
>webcasting (generally because broadcast stations
>fear
>they are losing audience to large webcasters),
>terrestrial radio does NOT pay performance
>royalties,
>so this argument doesn't make any sense. Satellite
>
>radio and webcasters pay performance fees, but
>terrestrial radio only pays composer fees.
>Terrestrial radio has traditionally been viewed as
>a
>promotional force for the labels, and the
>relationship
>between stations and labels/promoters considered
>mutually beneficial. There's talk now about
>reexamining that longstanding deal, but it hasn't
>happened yet.
>
>Further, the new rules impact every broadcast
>station
>that also streams its signal, so, while the RIAA
>may
>be attempting to "protect" its entrenched
>interests,
>nearly all the radio people I know, even at the big
>
>companies like Clear Channel and CBS, are very
>opposed
>to this fee increase. Many terrestrial radio
>stations
>recognize that webcasting has expanded their
>audience,
>and don't want to see it go away.
>
>And the costs WILL be prohibitive to many existing
>radio stations, large and small, and will hit
>non-commercial broadcasters particularly hard,
>since
>the prior arrangement had non-commercial
>broadcasters
>paying a flat fee for their webcasts. Under the
>new
>structure, if non-commercial broadcasters pass a
>fairly low monthly usage cap, they are subject to
>the
>same fees as commercial broadcasters. This would
>very
>likely cause stations like KEXP, WFMU, and KCRW
>(and
>my station, WLUW) to have to shut down their
>streams.
>
>
>
>
>
>___________________________________________________
>_________________________________
>Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship
>answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers -
>Check it out.
>http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=3965454
>33
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.