Daily news and commentary on the key issues involving radio and the Internet    
     

About us
Welcome!
Contact RAIN
Feedback form

Coherent Design

Archives
Past issues
Site reviews
Guest essay
Metrics analysis

Resources
Copyright Law
DMCA

Metrics
Arbitron
   Channels
   Networks
MeasureCast
   Weekly
   Monthly

Click here to make RAIN your default homepage!


We'll send you a brief daily summary of each day's stories with a clickable link to the RAIN home page.

 

 
...
Please look to our site "Save Internet Radio" to see how webcasters are fighting to save their industry. Want to help? Find out what you can do at SaveInternetRadio.org.
...

Rosen calls pending webcaster bankruptcies "an empty threat"
The following is an excerpt
from The Network Magazine's interview with RIAA president Hilary Rosen, from their Page6.net website. (The Network Magazine is the Clear Channel Entertainment-owned group of radio trade publications such as Album Network, Urban Network, and Network 40.)

The interview dealt with Rosen's reactions to issues facing the recording industry like file-sharing and artists' rights, as well as webcasting royalties.

NM: "There are already artist managers who believe that the rates their artists get from being 'played' on the labels' pay services, Pressplay and MusicNet, are little more than pennies on the dollar. If that's true, won't that discrepancy deteriorate your relationship with the artists even further?"

HR: "All of those issues are between the individual artists and labels, but the one thing that everybody should remember is that these services are just getting off the ground. The key thing is to first establish these businesses and grow them. However, for someone to take the attitude that there's no point in supporting a legitimate business model against piracy is shortsighted. Again, we're in the infant stages here."

NM: "Isn't that the same line of reasoning Internet and terrestrial radio stations use in claiming that they can't afford to exist if they have to pay the proposed copyright fee?"

HR: "There's a significant difference. The people who have spent money and invested the means to create the music are entitled to a return on their investment. The [copyright] issue affects people and parties who are building their own businesses using the music created and produced by others. It's very different if a record company or artists want to sell their own stuff -- or even give it away for a promotion if they want to -- but the whole point is someone else shouldn't be making that decision for them."

NM: "I take it the RIAA's pretty satisfied with the C.A.R.P. [Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel] proposal."

HR: "Nobody's quite satisfied with the ruling. That's what arbitration does. We've tried to settle it with Webcasters for two years and have been unable to come up with a viable agreement. The fact that they're complaining now is not much comfort to anybody, because [the proposed rate] might have been different had there been more discussions. There have been settlements, but I am still confident that these businesses have the opportunity to make money to sell new services. Even if they can't see a revenue side for them this year or next year, at least it has set an important precedent for artists and record companies in the future."

NM: "So it wouldn't bother you if, as predicted, a great majority of terrestrial and Internet outlets do go out of the Webcasting business, depriving the labels of any revenue whatsoever?"

HR: "I find that to be an empty threat. Radio stations, in particular, would only be in business if they see money in it. There's no reason that artists and record companies should offer their product for this business unless they see money in it as well. Now should I feel guilty that they won't have the business they hoped for because we're not willing to give them product for free? No."

NM: "Several radio interests assert that a percentage-of-revenues solution would provide a better way for both parties to maximize profits."

HR: "Actually, that's not true. We offered several alternatives and private settlements with rates more dependent on growth and a percentage of revenues. They rejected all of those, then we went to arbitration."

 

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

 

Canadians may compensate artists by taxing digital storage
From Wired News:
"Canadians may soon be smuggling blank CDs across the border in an effort to avoid the high taxes that have been proposed for any recordable media that can be used to store music.

"The tax, called the Private Copying Tariff and backed by the Copyright Board of Canada, is intended to compensate musicians for income lost when consumers copy music onto digital storage media.

"The proposed tax would be collected from the products' manufacturers, but industry groups said they believe the costs would be passed to consumers and would result in higher prices for all digital storage media and devices...

"If approved, the new tax would levy an additional fee of 59 cents (Canadian) on blank CDs. Memory cards, such as those used in handheld computers or digital cameras, would be taxed at 0.8 cents per megabyte of storage space. Manufacturers of blank DVD discs would pay an extra $2.27 per disk.

"Hardware manufacturers would also be affected. Makers of MP3 players would pay $21 in fees for each gigabyte of memory available on their devices, raising the cost of devices like Apple's iPod by more than $100.

"'Products are already painfully expensive in Canada due to the poor exchange rate on our dollar,' [corporate law attorney Joseph] McCormick said. 'Adding more fees on top of those prices will stifle business or turn people into criminals. Mark my words: They will start smuggling blank CDs across the border.'"

Read this article in Wired here.

 


Have an opinion? Drop us a note! (Or, to use your own e-mail software, click here.)

  Your e-mail address:
  Your name (if not obvious from your e-mail address):
    Kurt, this is deep background -- don't quote me!

        Thanks!

 

 

We'll send you a brief daily summary of each day's stories with a clickable link to the RAIN home page.
 

"Believing they own anything that can be digitized..."


Per the Village Voice "Rough Trade" article (RAIN's coverage here): The article's author, Doug Wolk , and his "Little Johnny" example, hurt all people who derive their living from labels and selling recorded music. The article states their desire to access digitally recorded entertainment (music, movies, books, games) on MP3, which they acknowledge will always be accessible for FREE! The article even implies that if you can hear a song you can record it into MP3, even streams.

I hope the Village Voice did not pay Mr. Wolk for this written damage because "Little Johnny" wants that digital discourse to be FREE also. And I want full-page ads in the Village Voice for FREE too. Not OK with The Voice or Mr. Wolk? Just because "Little Johnnys" want digital entertainment for FREE (MP3) does not really make it OK either!

I will gladly pay for music and never support "Little Johnnys" who steal via peer-to-peer (most of whom are overpaid in the Tech industry, not poor students as the article infers).

Please stop your editorial support also. The CARP issue is about how much to pay copyright owners for streaming other people's music; the V.V. article is about continuing the MP3 format and how they can always be stolen.

The arrogance and prejudice of the Tech industry in believing they own anything that can be digitized is unmatched at record labels, and I have been in the executive suites of both industries. Thank you.

  David Bean
former VP Musicmatch.com

Mr. Bean's experience also includes stints as director of Onradio.com, and president of both CTI Records and Pacific Arts Records.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ed. reply:

Mr. Bean makes some excellent points here. Looking back at the analysis that followed the article, I wish I had made it clearer that I agree with David that theft is wrong, and that creators and owners of creative works should be compensated for their efforts.

Record labels have the right and duty to defend their business and protect what is theirs. But the way they are going about it really reminded me of the webcasting royalty situation, thus our treatment of the article.

I really think the recording industry hurts itself when, by trying to address problems like piracy and copyright theft, it alienates those who could potentially help the industry. I can't pretend I have the solution to rampant file-copying, but I have to believe that lashing out at everyone who's tried a file-sharing service, and eliminating consumers' "fair use" rights (through the industry's support of the Hollings bill) isn't it.

(Seth Godin wrote a really nice "blog" on this topic on his site. It's the March 18th entry here. Thanks to RAIN reader Aaron Siler for pointing it out.)

Now while the positive aspects of file sharing for the labels are debatable, webcasting it would seem has nothing but upside. They get free promotion of both mainstream and niche artists, and they will get paid for it! Its positive impact won't be huge yet, but it has potential. How can labels lose by encouraging webcasting?

Yet the royalty rate the recording industry demanded before CARP (much higher than what the arbitrators came up with) seems to indicate the thinking that if Internet radio can't be a cash cow for them, the major labels would rather crush it.

In other words, this is where I have to disagree with Mr. Bean. The CARP issue is not simply about how much to pay for the use of copyrights. It's about an industry so caught up in their problems they are trying to stomp out something that could actually help them.
-- PM



"Industry should be fostered..."


As an independent record label owner, and BMI publisher, I agree with the premise that the artist and record company should be paid.

I am also a fledgling web-broadcaster. This industry should be fostered and allowed to grow, rather than be legislated out of existence by big league record companies with shortsighted scope. In the long run Internet radio could be a "promotional tool" to help sell more eclectic artists, and niche markets.

Please don't destroy the future of this potentially creative, and unique medium.

  David Floodstrand, President
Criterion Records
Kitty Dog Music Publishing
Oviforum Radio.


"Why indict MP3?.."


I must say that I disagree with this statement in your otherwise thoughtful and insightful letter to Congress:

"It's no doubt true that record company revenues are at risk in this 'digital millennium,' but that's due to the phenomenon of MP3 file sharing (e.g., Napster) and the growing popularity of the 'CD burners' which allow consumers to make unlimited perfect copies of CDs." (See RAIN story here).

Why indict MP3 as your sentence seems to do? The really brilliant aspect of CD burning is the ability to make compilations privately for oneself and to have the capability to use these technologies in creative educational ways. I think we should celebrate and advocate that aspect -- so I must object to your statement stating that there is no doubt that the technology is inherently a "rip off" technology. I think just the opposite is the case.

  Randal Baier


"What are they going to do when IBOC becomes a reality?.."


If the RIAA fears the loss of sales from the Internet because somebody might download a song from a webcaster, what are they going to do when IBOC (In Band On Channel) digital radio becomes a reality?

Listeners have been recording music off of radio for years. We're heading for the day when what we play and what they record is as good as the original. "Hey dudes.. It's an all request weekend..."


  Bill Taylor
 

Apr. 5-8, 2002 Broadcast Education Association 2002: Las Vegas, NV
Apr. 6-11, 2002 NAB 2002: Las Vegas, NV
Apr. 23-26, 2002 Streaming Media West 2002: Los Angeles, CA
Apr. 25-26, 2002 Beyond the DMCA: A Copyright Conference: Washington, DC
Sept. 12-14, 2002 NAB Radio Show 2002: Seattle, WA
October 1-4, 2002 Streaming Media East: New York, NY
 

 

Search RAIN

(Hint: Use quotes)
Advanced Search



Click Here for RAIN Radio!


Publications
R&R
RBR
Radio Ink
All Access
Inside Radio
   

Internet Pubs.
Red Herring
Business 2.0
   
Other Publications
(was eRadio)
(Taz Media)
FMQB
   

Software for RAIN's daily e-mail reminders provided by:

 



 
 

TOP

Copyright 2003, RAIN Publications, Inc. All rights reserved.
All logos and trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Your RAIN staff
Kurt Hanson
Publisher
Paul Maloney
Editor
Ralph Sledge
"Site of the Day" Editor
David Don
Developer
Brad Knutson
Intern
Ben Huh
Project Manager