Raising Barriers to Entry into the Music Business 272
Rusty reports: "Friday afternoon, the RIAA and SoundExchange announced a temporary payment plan and fee reprieve for small webcasters while congress considers legislation.. Basically, by Monday, Oct 21st, small webcasters will need to pay a $500 a year minimum fee ($2500 max). While this rate still may be a problem for hobbyist webcasters, it is lower than the $2500-$6500 minimum that HR5469 called out.
From the RIAA's SoundExchange site:
This still provides no relief for Live365, although their appeal hasn't been heard yet.""Any webcaster that qualifies as an 'eligible small webcaster' under H.R. 5469 will not be required to pay on October 20 the per performance (.0762 cents) royalties otherwise due under the Librarian of Congress' decision of July 8, 2002.
Instead, by October 21st, these eligible small webcasters may instead pay only the $500 annual minimum fee set by the Librarian of Congress for each year or portion thereof they have been in operation since 1998 (a maximum of $2500) until this Congress has had the opportunity to act on the pending legislation."
Ann Gabriel writes the following in response to Rusty's report from our last article on webcasting:
Brian Hurley of Detroit Industrial also had his response to Rusty's words from that article.It appears that the message being sent to me in the response by SOMA FM's Rusty is that since HR 5469 does not directly affect me, I should sit quietly by and watch this travesty play itself out without saying anything.
What happened with HR 5469 directly affects EVERYONE is the webcasting community and to pretend otherwise is a joke.
There is nothing wrong with the fact that a group of people set out to negotiate a private deal for themselves intending to save themselves from the retroactive royalties that will come due on October 20, 2002.
But there is something horribly wrong with the FACT that what began as a private negotiation ended up being turned into a piece of legislation forced as a yolk around the necks of people who had no say in the matter.
I am tired of being asked as a member of the webcasting industry to accept something so horribly wrong just because some people think this deal was "the best they could get."
To sit by and accept the events that led up to the negotiations and the formation of the actual bill language is something I cannot do.
To me it would be like being invited over to lunch and expecting to eat Chicken Salad - and then being served Chicken S**t. There might be a large portion of the webcasting community who can stomach that, but I can't.
The RIAA never had any intention of dealing fairly, honestly and respectfully with the webcasting industry. Those that sat down privately to negotiate a deal for themselves did so in their own best interest and for their own individual reasons. I don't believe there was anything wrong with that.
But when the self-serving agenda of a few becomes something that is foisted upon the community as a whole, then I cannot, must not and will not stand by and accept such an American Injustice.
It is patently clear to me that the IWA and the VOW are separate organizations. To that end if you read my open letter carefully you will see that I point out the deal was NOT negotiated on behalf of the IWA and it's members, of which I was one until last week.
Just because people are claiming right now that HR 5469 in its present form will not really hurt the industry does not mean that is the truth. The only entity that HR 5469 helps is the RIAA and it is a sad truth that they care nothing about the industry they are destroying.
Ann Gabriel
Gabriel Media Inc.
In case you haven't had a chance, here's the latest article from The Register on the state of HR5469 as it was introduced to the Senate, earlier this week. And as a bit of a wrap up to this roller coaster week, this Reuter's article serves to provide a nice summary of the situation so far.
Well, DUH! (Score:5, Informative)
The only good thing to come out of all this is that if they continue their currect practises, they'll render themselves irrelevant...
Small business argument... (Score:2, Informative)
The Internet Is Great For Musicians (Score:5, Informative)
That opinion piece isn't very clear... (Score:5, Informative)
Just glancing at stuff, a very disturbing aspect of the bill is that for an individual webcaster, it defines as "gross revenues" to include any revenue from media, entertainment, Internet or wireless business where the individual owns more than %5. I don't really know, if this is how it works, but if Joe Blow owns a computer consulting company doing wireless installs, (or hell has 5% of it), and he streams mp3s somewhere, does he have to pay licensing and royalty fees on the revenues of his business?!?!?!?
Looks like Gephardt and some other Democrats opposed [house.gov] it.
Re:RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
Here in holland it used to be 45 guilders and thus now 22 Euros...which in return is about 21,50 Dollars..
And no, that's not because I live in some shitthole, but that's everywhere!
Re:RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
If I were to go to any of the major reatil outlets here and buy a regular CD (not on sale, not part of a specially reduced back catalog series), yes, it would cost me $17.99 or $18.99 pre-tax. Prices get a little better if you visit a more independently minded retailer [othermusic.com], but the selection sometimes suffers. (Stocked titles are often more ecletic, and if your idea of "eclectic" doesn't match the owner's idea of "eclectic", yer out of luck.)
I wouldn't presume to say that the Big Apple is an accurate representation of the music market as a whole, but those prices the parent mentioned are indeed a reality for those of us in urban markets.
Re:RIAA (Score:2, Informative)
Re:It All Started With Punk! (Score:3, Informative)
Chris
Re:RIAA (Score:3, Informative)
Re:RIAA (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Simple... (Score:3, Informative)
Even with things like microphones, the price seems to increase by 4x between the highest grade "consumer" item and the lowest grade "pro" item (sometimes the consumer item is actually HIGHER quality). The effect, whether intentional or not, is lifting the barrier of entry.
Re:non-RIAA music (Score:3, Informative)
Please, name some.
Somebody below posted www.rantradio.com which plays non-RIAA industrial.
Re:RIAA (Score:4, Informative)
Allow me to recommend perusing some of Moses Avalon's [mosesavalon.com] books, which spell out the whole deal in detail on how royalties are computed.
Notable details include: if it's on CD, royalties are 75% because CDs are "new media". If it sells for 80% of full retail ($18) or less, you lose 50% because it's mid-tier (if it sells in bargain bins, you get nothing per unit). If it sells over the Internet, there's a 25% levy for a wire cost.
Re:What the hell? (Score:2, Informative)
When will you learn, things are cheaper in Canada!
Some of what you say is true, for example automobiles are far cheeper in Canada than they are in the US. For example you can buy a Honda Civic for 18 grand CDN, whereas in the states it goes for around 15 grand. Obviously not inline with the exchange rate of 1.5 cdn to 1 usd...
Unfortunatly, in Canada you'll be lucky to find a new artist for less that 20 dollars. As for old stuff, crappy stuff like the proclaimers or abba go for 15 dollars, whereas quality stuff like say the rolling stones can go for 25-30, and I have seen CDs for 40... all canadian dollars. The point is some things are cheeper in Canada, however CDs are more or less the same price.
As I side note, remember when records were like 8 bucks?
R.I.P. icecast (Score:2, Informative)
Sad.
The little guys are knocked off.
Recommendations for books to take as ones own. (Score:3, Informative)
I don't know what books you have read but I urge you to read the following two books. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading them and I plan to re-read them as soon as my friends return my copies back to me:
Around February 2003 you should be able to find Vaidhyanathan's new book The Anarchist in the Library (ISBN 0465089844) in hardcover. Given how approachable and clearly written Copyrights and Copywrongs is, I fully expect Anarchist in the Library to be worth everyone's while.
Lessig's book is the more scholarly of the two, but that takes away nothing from Vaidhyanathan's excellent book. I would not hesitate to cite, quote, and paraphrase from both of them in any research paper.
In case you're not familiar with Vaidhyanathan and Lessig check out Siva Vaidhyanathan's brief interview [slashdot.org] on Slashdot a while back. Lawrence Lessig's name might be more familiar as the lawyer who argued Eldred v. Ashcroft [eldred.cc] before the US Supreme Court on the side of Eric Eldred. Lessig has also done a Slashdot interview [slashdot.org].
Re:RIAA (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Simple... (Score:2, Informative)
I believe that if I were to webcast only myself talking into a microphone I would have to pay $500 per year to the RIAA and keep records of who listened for how long. This does seriously hinder the distribution of material outside the control of the RIAA, even when done with the permission of the creator.
Re:Freeware?? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:non-RIAA music (Score:2, Informative)
AudioTek Live (www.detroitelectronica.com)
Murknet (www.murknet.com)
Actually, it would take all day for me to list them all. (everything from avante garde to zydeco is out there streaming from somewhere.)
We don't have the flashiest web sites or tens of thousands of listeners, but I assure you, non-RIAA music stations are out here.