The US Court of Appeals decided to be collective dicks and rule in favor of what no one but Big Music wants and declined to postpone the Internet Radio royalty hikes. (Link: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070712-court-declines-to-postpone-internet-radio-royalty-hike.html)

The last chance internet radio has is the Internet Radio Equality Act going through Congress. Call your Congressmen TODAY (find the numbers and more information here: http://www.savenetradio.org/) or we'll risk losing sites like Pandora.com forever.

Come on. I just did it, it takes literally ten seconds. This was the conversation:

"Senator <whatever's> Office."
"Hi, I'd like to urge Senator <Whatever> to vote FOR the Internet Radio Equality Act."
"Alright, thank you."
"Thank you."

Here's hoping Americans don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Coolmatty, reconnect the damn server and I say we give those sons of *****es's ears what for!

so think how many you could get in in a day!!

(I'm not phoning america, sorry)

It was never DISconnected. You guys just stopped doing stuff with it.

So... it's still up? <_<

What exactly is it that you object to, happydud & people? Is the the $500 per year and the per user, per song fee?

I don't listen to internet radio, but don't you think musicians deserve royalties for their music?

You know what the COOL THING about this is?

It won't do any good because you don't have any money, goods, or services to persaude your senator with. :/

No.

Yeah my organisation got shot down when UCAS rolled around, but I tried connecting to it the other night and I can't.

Uh...are you joking or are you serious?

Of course, but the rates are unfair. This new bill proposes a flat 7.5% of profits rate, which is a lot more fair than $500/year + money for every single song played. (And do you think the record companies are going to get a tracklist of every song played? If they don't, how are they going to know to give .0000001 cents to band A, and .0000001 cents to band B?)

Besides, the royalties produced from sites like pandora for the bands would be miniscule compared to the profits the record companies would be taking in, not to mention it gives the world free access to these bands. There are a TON of bands that I have gone out and purchased CDs from because I first heard them on Pandora. Without pandora "getting the word out," a lot of bands would go largely unheard, because it is much harder to get on real radio than it is internet radio.


I'd like to bring up one other point. Record companies never made a big deal out of people recording off of the radio onto tapes back in the 80s. While this is slightly more widespread, I fail to see how this is significantly different.

Okay, if I alone call then sure, it wouldn't mean much. If a senator gets 500 calls today, I'm pretty sure it would say something and influence their decision, especially if they were on the edge.

The thing is that they can't really do anything about internet radio. There will always be someone setting up a broadcast server and sending their playlist over the internet for someone to listen in on. Winamp Shoutcast out Jetcast are a couple of examples of this.

It's just like copy-protecting audio cd's.. it just doesn't work since there will always be someone out there breaking the copy protection, there will always be someone out there finding ways to broadcast music.

Would you rather your song be heard by a massive audience who may later buy your album, or would you rather networks be shut down because you're not getting royalties?

I don't think it matters much if the band only gets .00001 cents per song - it's still better than receiving noting. As for your last point, if musicians want to give away their music in hopes of drumming up some business, then by all means let them do so. I just think it should be the their choice.



I'd guess that was because when music was being broadcast on normal radio the record companies (who always seem to be behind the technology curve) went nuts and when the dust settled, ASCAP and BMI had figured out a bunch of rules to ensure that muscians and themselves got paid when songs were played on the radio (even if fifty years later people were recording stuff).

What gives you the impression that nobody made a big deal over cassette tapes? Five minutes of searching brought up the Home Taping is Killing Music Campaign.



That depends on many things. Like I said to dud, if I'm shooting for maximum publicity (or if I'm already a rich and famous superstar) then maybe I care more about the exposure than the money. But if becoming world famous is not my goal, then I'd probably rather have the money.

The issue isn't whether royalties should be paid or not.

Internet radio stations like Pandora still have royalties.

This bill keeps them from raising the prices insanely high (prohibitively so).

i think internet radio should be subject those fees. in any case, internet radio stations shouldnt be seen as any different from real radio stations, imo.

I'm a musician and I stilll think the whole royalty thing needs to be rethought. It keeps fine genetleman like Sir Paul and Jimmy Webb nice and rich though. I and my buddies however get ****ed in the ***.

I mean, not that I don't like being ****ed in the ***. I just like it better when you guys do it and not some faceless corporation.

I listen to internet radio simply because there are not really any ads. I actually got into some new musicians because of it. F* internet radio if it's anything like regular radio, like he lawmakers will probably do. I'd like to see less bigger government. Also, several musicians submit material to these internet sites to promote themselves.

? I thought you were a soldier. My arguments only apply to professionals - people who make a living (or attempt to) off of the music industry.

But increasing the chances that people are exposed to your music, and might buy your music, will get you money faster than not getting exposure out there and just looking for a paycheck at a local club.

mansecks

I can't believe I just said that...

Senator McCaskill's office is close. Trying tomorrow.

And the sad thing is, that it won't.

Yeah, I'm with Rob. I'll still call McCaskill tomorrow, but I highly doubt she'll (or anyone else) will do anything.

If there's already a bill in Congress, it means that someone in power is doing something.

I don't understand. Music on the radio is pretty much advertising for the album/band. So why should people have to pay to publicize someone else's music?

The Music Industry is retarded and needs to be bombed dismantled.

Yeah, that's not how politics actually work. Corporations give money to a senator, that senator votes in that corporations favor. Public opinion doesn't really matter in American democracy.

look honestly record labels, with very few exceptions don't give a rats *** about the music or the bands, not really, all they care about is if the band is marketable and profitable. if the music is being played on the radio for free, then the label isn't making any money off it directly. sure they might get more exposure and people MAY buy more cd's... but probably not, it will probably wind up with more pirated music. and with cd sales already on the decline that is probably not a risk many execs are willing to take. sucks but... there you have it.

I think I'm gonna call up my senator and urge him to vote against the act. You know, just to be an *** (and because I don't care).

Watch out, Craig can suck your soul out of your body through a telephone. I've seen it.

I'm not voting in favor of warez, here, but the entire thing about copyright is assbackwards. They're charging people for advertising their music. It's downright stupid, and it's in all sorts of ways a greedy music company trying to make more of a buck. It isn't about the artists, and it isn't about morality. It's about cheap music industry trying to thwart the non-producer-role internet music world.

Mormons have souls?

Just called both SC senators and my representative. It's better to possibly contribute than to just give up beforehand and definitely not contribute.
Calling all three people takes at most a couple of minutes, and you have the chance to help make a difference.

In fact, because they don't have to worry about physical property/plant costs, they should be charged even more to keep the industry competitive!

I wonder, does this apply to college radio stations with an internet broadcast? Because if it does, there's one more activity I can cross off.

What's that?

ragna, the issue isn't whether those fees should exist or not, it's how much those fees should be. Read the first topic here: http://www.savenetradio.org/about/myths_and_facts.html

Marine. I also drive a Zamboni.


But if the ladies think I am a professional musician then they think I'm a sensetive "warrior-zamboni-poet."

Because wasting your time is AWESOME.