x Yesterday's late edition of RAIN announced a House subcommittee meeting to be held June 28th to discuss a possible solution to the CRB rate crisis. Read full coverage in today's issue here. -- DM x

x RAIN has assembled a page of "Day of Silence" resources for both webcasters and media to consult for specific details on the event as they are announced. Click here for that page. -- DM x

From Jerry Del Colliano's Inside Music Media blog: "...[T]errestrial radio uses silence in the wrong way aiding their enemies and not helping their brethren Internet streamers. They refuse to get behind the "Day of Silence" this coming Tuesday that would make a huge PR statement to the media and elected officials who are the only ones who can really right the unfairness in the CRB's ruling.

"Just one terrestrial broadcaster has agreed to join the protest Tuesday [Ed. note: That broadcaster is Greater Media]...

"Terrestrial radio broadcasters need to stop their Internet music streams for one day.

"Pandora is doing it. So are the other major online streamers: Live 365, Launchcast, Rhapsody, MTV, Real Networks, AccuRadio among others...

"Clear Channel is a streamer. Where are they? How about CBS and the other major consolidators?

"Broadcasters have been awfully proficient at talking a good game but now that they're being asked to simply shut up, they can't or won't do it.

"Won't? Why not. Can you say HD radio?...

"HD radio is not worth it and is not worth with holding radio's support for a unified front against unfair royalties on streaming.

"The radio industry is going to wear this mistake on their bottom lines for a long time to come. They [will] need a major presence on the Internet through rebroadcasting their terrestrial signals to creating new channels. And when they do, they will be paying the same outlandish rates that are going to force a lot of Internet streamers out of business July 15th.

"This is one time when radio wins by not saying anything. This is one time when Clear Channel can finally put some meaning into 'Less Is More'... This is one time when the record labels' march toward performance fees can be halted by taking a unified stand against the CRB inequity.

"In other words, actions speak louder than words. Help Internet streamers help you.

"Go silent Tuesday or else stay silent after Tuesday and don't complain when the fate of your Internet future is sealed by your inaction."

Read the whole blog post at Inside Music Media.

REPRINTED FROM YESTERDAY'S LATE ISSUE

From a U.S. House media advisory: "The House Committee on Small Business will hold a hearing entitled 'Assessing the Impact of the Copyright Royalty Board Decision to Increase Royalty Rates on Recording Artists and Webcasters.' Small Webcasters that provide daily music entertainment to individuals nationwide will be at risk of going silent on July 15, after an increase in royalty rates from the Copyright Royalty Board
(CRB) comes into effect.

"The hearing will examine the decision to raise rates, the impact it will have on Internet Radio, and the challenges of providing fair compensation for copyright owners while maintaining a business environment that allow small Webcasters to thrive.

"The committee will hear testimony from various Internet Radio outlets, as well as music artists that stand on both sides of the issue...

"When: Thursday, June 28 10 a.m.
Where: 2360 Rayburn House Office Building"

From the Hollywood Reporter: "An artists' rights group has accused Clear Channel Communications of forcing musicians to give up their digital copyrights to get the airplay the radio giant is required to give under the payola consent decree governing the broadcasters' operations.

"The Future of Music Coalition contends that Clear Channel is forcing independent musicians to sign a contract containing language that gives up musicians' rights to a performance royalty if the company uses their music for Webcasts.

"'This is outrageous,' FMC executive director Jenny Toomey said...

"A copy of the license agreement [pictured below right] on WWDC 101, a Clear Channel station in Washington, includes language saying: 'You grant to Clear Channel the royalty-free nonexclusive right and license in perpetuity (unless terminated earlier by You or Clear Channel as set forth below) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, digitally perform, publicly display and distribute any sound recordings, compositions, pictures, videos, song lyrics ...'

"A Clear Channel spokesperson said 'the FMC folks have it wrong.'

"'Clear Channel Radio has gone above and beyond to make this artist-friendly,' spokeswoman Michele Clarke said. '...[The artists] control whether they just want it considered for broadcast over the air, whether they want it considered for streaming online, whether they want it to be available for download or all three, and... they have the right to terminate their license at any time upon notice to us,'...

"The digital performance royalty,... is split 50-50 between copyright owner, typically a label but sometimes the artists or other entities, and the performer."

Read the entire article at the Hollywood Reporter.

...

x ClearChannel is now bracing for the possibility of having a performance royalty levied on them from both sides, online and terrestrial. Judging from the CRB rates, they shouldn't be hopeful that a terrestrial royalty, like the one being pursued by groups like musicFIRST, should be any less unreasonable than the webcast rate. On its face, this artist agreement could mean better access for indie artists to Clear Channel's tight playlists, especially online and over HD radio. Artists hungry for the promotional push that comes from the reach of a company like Clear Channel might jump at the chance. If the (somewhat unlikely) purpose of this agreement is to increase indie artists' exposure on the broadcast, fine. But the agreement on the WWDC site probably isn't directed towards major labels or their artists — they already have CC's programming ears and all the access they need. The darker side of this hypothetical coin, though, is even the idea that performance royalties would be side-stepped for airplay consideration. Seems like a slippery slope if there ever was one. If side-stepping royalties for airplay consideration is on the table, how blurry is the line between this and labels offering royalty-free tracks to radio, online and terrestrial, for airplay? That's just payola by a different name. -- DM x