Forgot your password?
Music Media The Almighty Buck Your Rights Online

60-Day Reprieve For Internet Royalty Rate Hike 91

Posted by kdawson
from the breathe-easier-then-mobilize dept.
Chickan writes "The Copyright Royalty Board has officially posted its ruling on Internet royalty rates in the Federal Register. However, the organization has pushed back the due date for royalty payments to kick in from May 15 to July 15. The publication of this information also begins the official 30-day period for appeals. NPR is slated to file an appeal in this timeframe."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

60-Day Reprieve For Internet Royalty Rate Hike

Comments Filter:
  • The retroactive part (Score:5, Interesting)

    by i_should_be_working (720372) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @10:11AM (#18971935)
    This whole thing is disgusting.

    But I have a question about the retroactive part. It seems that not only will stations have to pay more in the future, but they have to pay more for the past year or so. How is that legal? Also, does anyone know how it would be enforced? If a station just shuts down and doesn't pay for the past year, then what?
  • Here's hoping! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jugalator (259273) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @10:29AM (#18972191) Journal
    I really, really hope the Internet Radio Equality Act [] will go through ASAP for this, or it'll likely become a devastating blow to most serious Internet radio stations out there. :-/
  • by Otter (3800) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @10:41AM (#18972393) Journal
    I'm constantly posting here to explain why copyrights and patents are vital for continued innovation and creativity, and why you "Music and movies suck so that's why I have to steal them!" people are idiots. And I wrote to my representatives the minute Pandora sent me the above link. All the music I've purchased over the last few years is stuff I've learned about from Pandora, Live365 and Garageband, and keeping it legal is what allows me to talk down to you whiny thieves.

    If you don't take action on this, you've forfeited your right to ever post moronic "Teh RIAA is suing teh singal mothers!" comments again.

  • by bishiraver (707931) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @11:14AM (#18972977) Homepage
    Dude, I've purchased more music since listening to Pandora than I had in the previous four years. I've found some really interesting off-the-wall/radar artists with their service, and have spent approximately $130 in iTunes and amazon (via the pandora affiliate links so they get some c-c-c-cash) on their albums in the past 8 months. The RIAA gets their money, maybe, but I want my music. It's anecdotal, but it proves a certain point: internet radio helps people find obscure music; obscure but good music drives sales; sales make more money. In the long run, it will only be good for the music industry: too bad the RIAA is looking out for the suits who want to bolster the status quo this quarter instead of looking to what will make profits rain down six quarters or six years from now. Mainly because they're smelly old men who are only going to live for a few more years anyways, so who cares about future profits? GIMME MY LEAR JET NOW!
  • by Mockylock (1087585) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @11:24AM (#18973141) Homepage
    The only reason I'm really concerned is that my friend actually runs a radio station that promotes local and upcoming bands. They send in music to them, they play NO profit gaining advertisements and send all of their extra CD's and gathered donations (posters, pictures, etc) to the troops.

    They ALSO have an air radio station that's low wattage that runs the same music around Pittsburgh.

    Now, if this appeal doesn't stop them.. My friend will have to pay an unGodly amount of money per month EVEN for music that was given to them by the bands. But, in order for people to even listen to the new bands, you have to play well-known music as well.
    At this point, he'll have to shut it down completely. $500 minimum charge per year is more than enough to hurt someone who's paying for the broadband and electric anyway. What good can come of this? They can't charge air-wave radio stations because they don't know how many listen to it.. so, they GIVE them music to promote songs as long as they play them X amount of times.. and it has to be logged.
    They're getting away with EVERYTHING they can.
  • by SupermanX (1042838) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @11:45AM (#18973531)
    Well, I think you have the right idea...
    However THIS is what I would suggest.

    Require RADIO to pay these fees as well, and remove any option for a negotiated deal with individual studios. Make everyone pay the same fees...

    Terrestrial Radio has a much bigger lobby, and if they had to pay similar fees, they would fight this every step of the way. This would force the established media to fight for the rights of the new media... because they have been lumped together.
  • by Gonarat (177568) * on Thursday May 03, 2007 @01:33PM (#18975309)

    This may be a dumb question, but could independent "label" sites such as CD Baby or DMusic (home of, not to be confused with Emusic) set up an easy way to allow internet radio stations to play music from their artists at a better price? It would be a pain in the ass to have to contact every band or singer that you want to play on your internet radio station, but being able to play any group from say CD Baby and pay them directly would be doable. The site could even create weekly or monthly play lists of songs that are approved if they wanted to give their Artists the option to allow or not allow their songs on internet radio at the site rate.

    If this is legal and practical, then it seems like the Independent Musician could flourish while the RIAA can have all the control over their crap that they want. I would love to see the RIAA (and SoundExchange) suffer due to their greed and miserly ways, but not at the expense of the real Musicians.

    How about it CD Baby, DMusic (and others)? Is this a legal option?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, 2007 @03:43PM (#18977701)
    What strikes me as interesting is HOW do the record companies get away with depriving musical artists of the rights taken for granted by book authors? I think they fear the internet and internet radio because it threatens the biggest clubbing weapon they have against the artists they sign: Distribution.

    Napster was *bad* until they figured out how to do the same thing and take their cut, but what of the artist? How much of the money went to the maker of the product vs. corporations seeking to make the most of their positions as middle men?

    I think that the players of the internet industry are every bit as big as the corporations represented by the RIAA. I think Amazon, AOL Music, Walmart, MSN, etc should get together with terrestrial and internet radio and create (or facilitate the creation of) independent labels along the model of book authorship where the music creator KEEPS his/her copyright and s/he or his/her agent sets up an arrangement where they each take a negotiated percentage of sales.

    It wouldn't be long before they'd sign artists away from the conventional labels. Prince for instance has released music on the internet and I think titled one album "Emancipation" to express his discontentment with his Warner label obligations. Besides freedom, its probably more financially advantageous for the artist who otherwise must sell his soul to the label to get distribution, marketing, and airplay.

    Personally, I just think the RIAA needs the competition. The music radio stations play (terrestrial or internet) amounts to advertising music product with the expectation of music sales. For any other product, the advertiser would be expected to PAY the broadcaster (or media channel)... yet somehow broadcasters must pay the RIAA to create the sales that line their pockets (even moreso than the artists themselves)...

    I think this situation represents a good business opportunity for webradio and a nightmare for the RIAA and its quickly becoming obsolete business model. I hope the internet side takes up the challenge.

"Tell the truth and run." -- Yugoslav proverb