From the Broadcast Law Blog, by David Oxenford: "As reported in Digital Music News and other publications on Friday, Clear Channel Communications dropped its waiver of music royalties from its on-line agreement signed by musicians submitting songs to the Company in hopes that their music would be played on the Company's radio stations [previous RAIN coverage here].

"In writing about this decision, most publications attribute the decision to the petition filed with the FCC by the Future of Music Coalition and other public interest groups arguing that the waiver requests constituted a form of payola...

"However, on close inspection, that would appear to be a misunderstanding of the royalty, as there would seem to be no royalty that would be affected by the waiver in connection with the playing of this music by radio stations, and therefore there would be no payola over which the FCC has any jurisdiction...

"[T]he royalty waiver only confers a benefit in the on-line world, especially in on-demand services such as downloads and podcasts, not subject to the statutory royalty set by the Copyright Royalty Board. Over these services, the FCC has no jurisdiction. Moreover, the impact of any proposal to limit these waivers... presents some real issues in for services such as Internet Radio that are looking to these waivers as a possible means of reducing their royalties.

"Since the decision of the Copyright Royalty Board on Internet Radio, it has always been assumed that one way some services could reduce their royalties was to get direct licenses from musicians...

"There have even been discussions by several parties of setting up clearinghouses for music that could be played royalty-free as a way of encouraging the use of that music — and allowing Internet Radio stations to reduce their obligations and survive under the new royalties... If providing royalty-free music to Internet Radio stations constitutes some sort of legal issue, such exchanges could be imperiled.

"While the Future of Music Coalition has suggested that the FCC petition continue even though Clear Channel has withdrawn their waiver, some consideration should be given as to whether the waiver policy is really contrary to the public interest — or if such waivers may actually promote the widespread use of new and otherwise underexposed new music."

Read the entire blog post at the Broadcast Law Blog.

From a Seattle Times editorial: "Listeners can continue to ride the stimulating stream of Internet radio — at least for now.

"Negotiations between SoundExchange, the organization that collects and distributes music royalties, and assorted groups representing Internet radio stations have postponed the ruin of the innovative medium...

"Any new agreement, which would have to be approved by CRB, must take into account the slim budgets of independent radio, and also recognize that Internet radio is a developing media area. It needs to be nurtured, not hammered into submission by the media conglomerates that control the music industry...

"Webcasters need to quickly negotiate an agreement that does not bleed Internet radio to death while still being fair to musicians. Congress must step in if an agreement cannot be reached and support a bill co-sponsored by Rep. Jay Inslee, D- Bainbridge Island, that would help Internet radio.

"If a new agreement or new legislation is not forthcoming, Internet radio has a quiet future."

Read this entire Seattle Times editorial online here.

From the New York Times: "Hoping to persuade skeptical regulators to approve their proposed merger, the nation’s two satellite radio companies today announced detailed plans to let consumers choose the programs that make up their subscription package.

"The companies, Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio, said they would offer two so-called 'à la carte' pricing plans — one of which would enable consumers to purchase the best of the premium services now offered by each company, like professional football, baseball and basketball — for a monthly fee of $14.99. To subscribe to the 'à la carte' plans, consumers would have to buy new radios...

"The announcement, coming the day before the record closes in the proceeding at the Federal Communications Commission, was an effort to persuade the agency that the merger was in the public interest. Several of the five commissioners, including Chairman Kevin J. Martin, have raised significant concerns about the deal because it would result in the creation of only one satellite radio service...

"The merger has come under assault by the National Association of Broadcasters and consumer groups who say it would be anti-competitive.

"'Policymakers should not be hoodwinked by today’s announcement, since nothing is stopping either XM or Sirius from individually offering consumers a more affordable choice in limited program packages' ... said Dennis Wharton, executive vice president of the National Association of Broadcasters...

"The merger’s architect, Mel Karmazin... said that the companies, which have never made a profit, were unable to offer à la carte plans if they did not merge because it would be too expensive."

Read the New York Times coverage here.

Advertisement

The Internet Radio Equality Act now has 139 co-sponsors in the House.

	Representative Sanford Bishop, Jr. Georgia's 2nd District 8th-term Democrat
	Representative Zoe Lofgren California's 16th District 7th-term Democrat Key committee(s): Judiciary
	Representative Brad Miller North Carolina's 13th District 3rd-term Democrat
	Representative Tom Udall New Mexico's 3rd District 5th-term Democrat
	Representative Peter Welch Vermont (at-large) 1st-term Democrat