|
Pandora's losses highlight DMCA's effect on Internet radio
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 26 August, 2011
Pandora, the popular Internet radio service, continues to grow at an amazing pace, so why is it they can't seem to turn a profit?
The answer lies in a fateful ruling from the Copyright Royalty Board. The CRB's existence is the result of a DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) provision mandating arbitration to determine fair Internet radio royalties in the event rights holders and webcasters ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. August 2011 @ 14:46 |
Link to this message
|
More idiot a$$holes trying to get something for nothing. The CRB is nothing more than BMI or ASCAP bilking the very organizations for money that 1. won't ever get to the artists, 2. that wouldn't have been generated from record sales had it not been for the 'free airplay' originated by the broadcasting agencies in the first place.
Back when I was in radio (late 70s, early 80s) record companies sent you new titles/artists for free, hoping to get air time. Yet BMI & ASCAP race in, hot on the heels of any recording to charge the station thousands of dollars for having played those very same records/songs.
It has always been my opinion that radio stations should just purchase a copy of the album being released & fore go any further expenditures. This could certainly work seeing as BMI & ASCAP could have just as easily charged you & I for each time we played a song despite having initially purchased a copy. What do you think these 'cloud' services are designed for?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. August 2011 @ 14:48
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
26. August 2011 @ 23:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
I kinda hope Pandora and all the other free/cheap music services go under...that way, piracy would take their place and these greedy bastards wouldn't get jack!
|
Member
|
27. August 2011 @ 00:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
I kinda hope Pandora and all the other free/cheap music services go under...that way, piracy would take their place and these greedy bastards wouldn't get jack!
Think of the children!!!!
www.inebriare.com
Xbox Live: Rogue Jello - PSN: bam431 - IGN: bam431
Youtube: electrowaffle - Twitter: bam431
i5 760, P7P55D-E, Vapor-X HD5770, 8GB DDR3, 1TB HDD,
|
|
dEwMe
Senior Member
|
27. August 2011 @ 08:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
LOL speaking of the 70's...Anybody remember the "pay for play" scandals that rocked the industry where the record companies were actually paying bribes to get their stuff played on the radio?
I think they've lost site of the free advertising concept where someone hears a song on the radio and goes out and buys it (if they like it). Surely the business model has and is changing drasticly but..in the end..isn't radio (and internet radio) still providing the same service?
I can't say how many albums, tapes and CDs I have purchased over the years due to hearing something on the radio. Sure they need to find a better way to get paid (or at least the artists do) but if I never hear your track I won't be looking to buy it in any form.
Just my $0.02,
dEwMe
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
27. August 2011 @ 09:10 |
Link to this message
|
You know, eventually greed begets greed. Karma has an interesting way of biting people in the ass, and what goes around comes around. The more they clench the hands tighter guys, the more these music programs will slip through their fingers!! Piracy will rule no matter what, and they are just flailing their arms in the darkness, as they can't see their head from their ass!
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
27. August 2011 @ 14:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by dEwMe:
LOL speaking of the 70's...Anybody remember the "pay for play" scandals that rocked the industry where the record companies were actually paying bribes to get their stuff played on the radio?
70s hell, it got started back in the 50s with the Payola scandals. Dick Clark was one of the biggest asswipes benefiting from it. The best depiction & historical insight to the scandal is in a movie named American Hot Wax (1978), loosely based on Alan Freed. He basically wouldn't cave in to the FCC hammering down on payola & he lost his entire career over it.
Funny how it's a complete contradiction when the same labels (through a middle man, BMI & ASCAP) turn around & come re-collecting for the airplay that these guys started. Just goes to show you how hypocritical these business' are.
|
Staff Member
2 product reviews
|
27. August 2011 @ 18:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by LordRuss:
Originally posted by dEwMe:
LOL speaking of the 70's...Anybody remember the "pay for play" scandals that rocked the industry where the record companies were actually paying bribes to get their stuff played on the radio?
70s hell, it got started back in the 50s with the Payola scandals.
And the last time I heard about a label getting in trouble for it was the 2000s.
The fact is these services offer free promotion, just like terrestrial radio. Of course the labels have frightened terrestrial broadcasters into giving them royalties as well. However, they benefited from actually being equals to the labels in their market, and got more reasonable terms.
Basically the whole thing is an all out effort to replace CD revenue by taking a cut from any service which is making money around their recordings. They don't believe for a moment that radio, Internet or otherwise, impacts music sales. They just can't figure out how to make as much money as they're used to without taking it from somebody else.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
28. August 2011 @ 13:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by vurbal:
Basically the whole thing is an all out effort to replace CD revenue by taking a cut from any service which is making money around their recordings. They don't believe for a moment that radio, Internet or otherwise, impacts music sales. They just can't figure out how to make as much money as they're used to without taking it from somebody else.
It has been a scam since 1914 (ASCAP's inception). CDs have absolutely nothing to do with it. These fleecing organizations are devised for the sole purpose of getting money for nothing. They will claim every profit based loss scam they can to justify their actions. Having a relative who is/was hired by BMI & ASCAP (as basic muscle to go & collect for them) told me that there is no such thing as 'honored customers' or budget payment plans for broadcasters or any other such individuals playing music in their establishments. Everybody gets screwed heavily & equally.
Muzak was invented & sold as a means of which for storefronts to play music in their establishments & not continually be harassed by BMI or ASCAP representatives. [Yes, they would actually come into a store & demand payments because you were playing a radio station where the general public could hear it] Seeing as the music being played is not performed by the original artist or any lyrics actually being performed, the songs fall outside the parameters of BMI/ASCAP's racketeering practices.
|
Staff Member
2 product reviews
|
28. August 2011 @ 14:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by LordRuss:
Originally posted by vurbal:
Basically the whole thing is an all out effort to replace CD revenue by taking a cut from any service which is making money around their recordings. They don't believe for a moment that radio, Internet or otherwise, impacts music sales. They just can't figure out how to make as much money as they're used to without taking it from somebody else.
It has been a scam since 1914 (ASCAP's inception). CDs have absolutely nothing to do with it. These fleecing organizations are devised for the sole purpose of getting money for nothing. They will claim every profit based loss scam they can to justify their actions. Having a relative who is/was hired by BMI & ASCAP (as basic muscle to go & collect for them) told me that there is no such thing as 'honored customers' or budget payment plans for broadcasters or any other such individuals playing music in their establishments. Everybody gets screwed heavily & equally.
Muzak was invented & sold as a means of which for storefronts to play music in their establishments & not continually be harassed by BMI or ASCAP representatives. [Yes, they would actually come into a store & demand payments because you were playing a radio station where the general public could hear it] Seeing as the music being played is not performed by the original artist or any lyrics actually being performed, the songs fall outside the parameters of BMI/ASCAP's racketeering practices.
This is separate from BMI/ASCAP royalties. This is exclusively for the recordings, and is on top of other royalties. In fact during the negotiations, webcasters argued the amount of the new royalties should be set based on performance royalties paid to songwriters and publishers. The CRB determined that the DMCA's language dictated a different calculation, which in turn resulted in significantly higher royalty payments to SoundExchange for use of the recordings than to ASCAP/BMI/SESAC for the compositions.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
28. August 2011 @ 15:45 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by vurbal:
This is separate from BMI/ASCAP royalties. This is exclusively for the recordings, and is on top of other royalties. In fact during the negotiations, webcasters argued the amount of the new royalties should be set based on performance royalties paid to songwriters and publishers. The CRB determined that the DMCA's language dictated a different calculation, which in turn resulted in significantly higher royalty payments to SoundExchange for use of the recordings than to ASCAP/BMI/SESAC for the compositions.
A point I made earlier on (with regards to CRB being another money grubbing spin-off). Obviously, the CRB is using 'new' verbiage in order to fill gaps not covered by the old language of ASCAP/BMI that clearly didn't/don't accommodate the newer digital formats & legislation.
I didn't mention SESAC as they are a 'paid' source of coercion & artist/composers have to 'join' their collective, but only after the artist has "been approved". I.e., they are a profit oriented entity. While BMI/ASCAP are Not-For-Profit organizations. Not only to mention, SESAC's mission is to basically sue you for not having a pre-paid 'license' to play a song (live or recorded in any format imaginable). Thus BMI/ASCAP work under the guise of a 'government style' heading, whereas SESAC is basically a law firm.
|
Staff Member
2 product reviews
|
28. August 2011 @ 16:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by LordRuss:
Originally posted by vurbal:
This is separate from BMI/ASCAP royalties. This is exclusively for the recordings, and is on top of other royalties. In fact during the negotiations, webcasters argued the amount of the new royalties should be set based on performance royalties paid to songwriters and publishers. The CRB determined that the DMCA's language dictated a different calculation, which in turn resulted in significantly higher royalty payments to SoundExchange for use of the recordings than to ASCAP/BMI/SESAC for the compositions.
A point I made earlier on (with regards to CRB being another money grubbing spin-off). Obviously, the CRB is using 'new' verbiage in order to fill gaps not covered by the old language of ASCAP/BMI that clearly didn't/don't accommodate the newer digital formats & legislation.
Not at all. ASCAP and BMI license Internet radio separately. Their cut of the pie isn't altered in any way by the CRB ruling.
It's the labels who get most of the performance royalties collected by SoundExchange, with a minority earmarked for artists who own their own recordings, many of whom aren't ever paid because they don't know to contact SoundExchange.
It wasn't exactly new in the DMCA. It was actually an extension of the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act from 1995. The DMCA just extended it to define how performance (recording rights) royalties would be set for Internet radio. It's a new class of licensing which didn't exist in analog (terrestrial) broadcasting.
The point is, it's not filling any cracks. It's adding an entire new wing to the building.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
28. August 2011 @ 17:14 |
Link to this message
|
Redundantly stating what I have already mentioned is of little help or comment worthy... Only to say that your interpretation of the DMCA is possibly flawed... in that the DMCA is for copyright infringement & not how monies are collected for the use of copyrighted material. The only stipulation (interpreted) is that other sub categorized governing bodies make those particular decisions.
As I will redundantly repeat: The aforementioned alphabet Nazis are nothing more than legal houses actively blackmailing moneys for content use or actively seeking restitution (due to allegedly legal based infringement) from a bled out industry that makes their very existence possible. I.e., if I may use such an analogy... another fast food chain store cropping up in an already bloated market.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
