Old 28th May 2008, 23:17   #281
alienbee
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3
alternative marketing

I think I have an idea
I'm a musician i write and preform my music, I would be willing to hand my material over to type of open source kinda license agreement to spite the music industry's greed..

if a majority of the 'artist's' migrate their material over into the same kinda open source type or agreement..

dont you think the artist stand a better chance of 'sharing' their music in that 'zone' then the more regulated 'zone'

I believe the bottom line comes to the artist..what kind of stipulations they want to 'enforce' on the listening public..

if their was an label logo they can tag to their albums that would indicate the 'enforcement' 'zone' their music is subscribing to..i believe the public would in the end decide what is best for a purchase.

and a grand statement of what artist believe the industry can shove its 'enforcement's' agenda..

I as an artist believe in the ritual of giving the music away to some extent, it to me validates that i will get a karmic return..

now im not saying give the music away completely..just subscribe to a zone that wont 'punish' a listener ..

I know of some artist out there that are not suffering a great deal for things under the current situation..for them its not the money more then the listener's loving their music...
is all from the heart to the heat in my opinion and people take care of the artist's they love..

its the greed thats gone astray..and allot of real artists out there that do it cause they love to do it.

and then you'll have the ones that will subscribe to the enforcement 'zone' ..and that right their would maybe cost them more in the end then having subscribed to the less regulated none 'enforcement' zone.



hell what would it take to start up a label that musicians can tag their material with that puts their musical works under a specific 'zone' that the industry cant touch with their greed?
alienbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2008, 00:28   #282
fc*uk
Moderator
 
fc*uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Atlantic Beach
Posts: 8,127
Many are doing this. NIN and Radiohead to name a few major bands. Furthermore, DJs across Europe are letting their mixes out (single songs and full sets) on their own independently operated labels ... which allow you to download directly from their website.

I don't mean to belittle your thoughts in any way; you are spot on. The problem is you need to remove greed from the "record industry" and/or you need to get every single major artist to adpot the same thinking all at once.

Either case is not bloody likely to happen, unfortunately.
fc*uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2008, 01:13   #283
alienbee
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3
or what about this...
start a web site that showcases "unsigned" bands...
bands out there without a record deal, garage bands, people who make music for fun...that sort of deal...

people and bands that are not bound and owned by a major lable, and thus have more freedom when it comes to their music...they could use the site as a showcase for their creations...

a web site that would be a clearing house for web casters...

anybody who podcasts, has an internet radio station...that sort of thing, could go to this site and choose from thousands of songs from every possible genre, and play the songs on their webcasts for free...

the bands get exposure, the webcasters get music for their shows...

and nobody has to pay Big Music a dime...

there are millions of bands out there that would contribute, and if your songs are crap, they don't get played...but if you're good, and need a platform to get out there, put your song up, and let webcasters use it for their shows...

crazy idea, huh?
alienbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2008, 01:32   #284
alienbee
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3
maybe even have artist petition amendments to their contracts that would 'allow' specific relaxed 'zones' that don't punish the webcasters for airing their music..

they can submit their material to websites that are generating webcaster 'safe' lists.

it could catch on and webcasters who find more artist through internal communications that get turned on by the underdog movement to submit some material on to the 'safe' list..

If web casters care enough to take care of the list and share it ..the list can expand ..many different genres for webcasters to share and choose from..

I can probably think of a few bands I know who are under contract that might have the balls enough to slap their proposal on the corporate desks to amend that they can select 'some' material to add to the underdog caster list..

if its packaged right it can be proposed fairly..

with the focus just so that webmasters can get a untied from the whipping post ..

generate some kind of relationship between the casters and the artist..their on the same team..
alienbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2008, 15:08   #285
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
No matter what, it should be allowed for a second company to deal with the royalty payments, otherwise it is a monopoly. The RIAA is a private company, they spawned Sound Exchange to keep their liability low, so it is another private company. There should be no problems getting another new company to collect the payments and disburse them to the recording companies. The only problem I see with this is that Sound Exchange will lose money to the other company, and this makes the RIAA angry.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2008, 21:44   #286
SorceryKid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 294
On Wednesday, June 11, the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property will be holding a hearing on the "Performance Rights Act" (H.R. 4789).

This is an ideal opportunity to re-inject the issue of Internet radio royalties into the legislative agenda. Therefore, various SaveNetRadio members have prepared their own written statements for the record.

You can read the full text of SWCI's submission here:

http://www.smallwebcaster.org/media/...nt06102008.doc

Regards,

_________
Randall E. Krause
Executive Director
Small Webcaster Community Initiative
info@smallwebcaster.org
SorceryKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2008, 14:58   #287
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
Wish I had known about this earlier. I would have asked our department chairperson to write a letter for inclusion stating how this could affect our radio classes.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 16:39   #288
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
Re: alternative marketing

Quote:
Originally posted by alienbee
I think I have an idea
I'm a musician i write and preform my music, I would be willing to hand my material over to type of open source kinda license agreement to spite the music industry's greed..

if a majority of the 'artist's' migrate their material over into the same kinda open source type or agreement..

dont you think the artist stand a better chance of 'sharing' their music in that 'zone' then the more regulated 'zone'

I believe the bottom line comes to the artist..what kind of stipulations they want to 'enforce' on the listening public..

if their was an label logo they can tag to their albums that would indicate the 'enforcement' 'zone' their music is subscribing to..i believe the public would in the end decide what is best for a purchase.

and a grand statement of what artist believe the industry can shove its 'enforcement's' agenda..

I as an artist believe in the ritual of giving the music away to some extent, it to me validates that i will get a karmic return..

now im not saying give the music away completely..just subscribe to a zone that wont 'punish' a listener ..

I know of some artist out there that are not suffering a great deal for things under the current situation..for them its not the money more then the listener's loving their music...
is all from the heart to the heat in my opinion and people take care of the artist's they love..

its the greed thats gone astray..and allot of real artists out there that do it cause they love to do it.

and then you'll have the ones that will subscribe to the enforcement 'zone' ..and that right their would maybe cost them more in the end then having subscribed to the less regulated none 'enforcement' zone.



hell what would it take to start up a label that musicians can tag their material with that puts their musical works under a specific 'zone' that the industry cant touch with their greed?
This is essentially what I am doing with my podcast. As long as the musician has the rights to wave their royalties in exchange for play and promotion on the podcast, it's all good. What I am trying to determine now is the feasibility of starting an internet stream with these bands in constant rotation.
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 16:55   #289
richard mitnick
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 53
Where is your podcast? How is it different from streaming, and why do you think they won't come after you and make you count your listeners and pay fees like a streamer?

I would like to look at your podcast.
richard mitnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:05   #290
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
A podcast is a download. Legally it is not a broadcast. The bands have the right to wave any mechanical or performance royalties if they so wish in exchange for the promotion. The key is that they have to have the rights to do so. (I know, I'm a lawyer).

The podcast is located at www.rockandrollreport.com

Mark
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:08   #291
richard mitnick
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 53
Sorry, I cannot get link to load.

>>RSM
richard mitnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:12   #292
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
http://www.rockandrollreport.com/

Strange. I am on the site now. Copy and paste it.

Try again and then scroll down to podcast #19

Mark
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:22   #293
richard mitnick
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 53
Please take no offense, I copied and pasted. This is what I got, it is a post in the Winamp forum

Here's what I got when I copied and pasted:

MegaRock
Forum King

Registered: Jun 2003
From: spying on you from NSA Headquarters
URL submitted by user

What the fuck is this shit? Everywhere on the website where there should be links I see:

URL submitted by user

What is this bullshit?

__________________
Megarock Radio: Listen 128k | Listen 32k | Embedded Player |[Megarock Chat | UltimateMetal
Add to Vista Sidebar | Dump IE, Get Firefox | Windows Toolbar | Megarock Podcasts | Frapper!
| Shoutcast Now Playing Script | WebcastersUnited.Com | Webcasters Links
richard mitnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:24   #294
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
very strange. Not sure what to tell you. Don't use the link from the post. Just open a new window and hand write in the link. It works as the site is getting live hits as I sit here watching the stats.
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:27   #295
richard mitnick
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 53
I would have put the link in myself, but the actual URL is not there.
richard mitnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 17:28   #296
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
rockandrollreportDOTcom
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 21:09   #297
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
Just because the bands give you permission does not mean you are completely covered under all circumstances. If the band is signed with a label, and you get the music from a CD recorded by that label, you still need to pay RIAA to license that recording. If the you get permission from that label, or the band is not signed and did the recording themselves (they are their own label), or last but not least the recording company sends you a "not for retail sale" demo CD (or any other CD that is meant for "air") for you to play on the air, then you are fine. At least this applies to streaming, if they know you are on-demand content, then you would be covered. But make sure everyone knows that this is for on-demand and not for streaming. The rates for the two are very much different and the on-demand rates are far higher than a stream.

I would like to think that they are pretty liberal about this radio stuff and will give you a warning before taking you to court. This is far different from "sharing" music on the internet (illegal download) so I would really hope that they would at least contact you and tell you to stop before going full tilt after a broadcaster/podcaster.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 21:56   #298
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
True enough but the key is that the bands have to control their own rights, which most of the ones I deal with do. I have had only one label turn me down outright despite the band agreeing to go ahead with it. Unfortunately their contract with their label allowed them to veto the idea (something they are modifying when the deal is over).

When it comes to podcasting you have to educate labels and bands about the benefits when approaching them. I have yet to have a problem as most unsigned and indie bands just want the exposure. I make sure I maintain a positive dialog with the labels and have had no issues so far (except for that one).
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2008, 22:09   #299
rockandrollmark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 7
One other point, a lot of bands and labels are submitting their music to sites like the Podsafe Music Network, IODA Promonet, Garageband.com and the like so that they are podsafe. The great thing about this is that it makes it extremely easy for a podcaster to listen to and include podsafe artists in their shows.

Another point is that my agreement with the artists doesn't deny that they are owed royalties to ASCAP, RIAA, etc. What it does is waive the requirement for me to pay them in exchange for being on the podcast. As part of this exchange they are listed in the shownotes with links to their website or MySpace page as well as links to where listeners can download their music from services like iTunes, Amazon or CD Baby.

I have always maintained that what I do is a partnership with the musicians and I am upfront with them at all times, unlike a lot of record labels unfortunately.
rockandrollmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th June 2008, 17:05   #300
SorceryKid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 294
The House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property yesterday completed their review and markup of the Performance Rights Act of 2007. It will now advance to the Committee on the Judiciary.

_________
Randall E. Krause
Executive Director
Small Webcaster Community Initiative
info@smallwebcaster.org
SorceryKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th June 2008, 05:30   #301
SorceryKid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 294
How the Sound Recording Performance Right Went Wrong

On June 10, 2008, The Department of Commerce submitted the following letter to Chairman Howard Berman generally endorsing the Performance Rights Act of 2007.

http://www.musicfirstcoalition.org/a...R4789views.pdf

However, given the relative abundance of mixed messages concerning the legal implications of this legislation (for record labels and recording artists), SWCI submitted its comments in response to the DOC letter accordingly:

http://www.smallwebcaster.org/media/...ts06162008.doc

Regards,

_________
Randall E. Krause
Executive Director
Small Webcaster Community Initiative
www.smallwebcasters.org
SorceryKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2008, 16:45   #302
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
I fail to see how (exactly) a complete European rate will stifle creativity. I also fail to see how this would in any way lower the amount of money returned to the artists.

As the world becomes a smaller place thanks to the 'net, it only makes more sense to have a world wide licensing for this type of entertainment. I say GO EU!!!! One step closer to what we need.

And from most of the recent releases, they have nothing to worry about, the vast majority of the newest music really sucks. No wonder that CD sales are down. The artists should remember that while it may be a way of life for them, it is purely entertainment for the rest of us, we can do without it very easily. I have (for personal use) only purchased about 2 or 3 CDs in the past 3 years because most of the stuff is not to my liking, I could easily go another many years with the stuff I already own (not for transmission) to keep me entertained. The whole music and movie industry leaves an offensive taste in my mouth.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2008, 02:20   #303
MegaRock
Forum King
 
MegaRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Inside my water bong
Posts: 6,855
Send a message via ICQ to MegaRock Send a message via Yahoo to MegaRock
Well, here is my question...

I've been gone from running my radio station for a little over a year. I just got sick of all the government meddling and have been holding out hope that in November people will smarten up and elect new people with more brains than the ones we currently have in DC.

In the past year what has really changed or are things still at the same point they were a year ago. I've only been back for a week and havent really made heads or tails out of it.

Is it really worth starting the station up again? Is there still enough ways to make money to fund a station enough to make a go of it a second time or am I just shitting in the wind?

Megarock Radio - St. Louis Since 1998!
Tune In Now!
Corporate Radio Sucks! No suits, all rock!
MegaRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2008, 13:55   #304
idobi
Senior Member
 
idobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 119
Send a message via AIM to idobi
Quote:
Originally posted by MegaRock
Well, here is my question...

I've been gone from running my radio station for a little over a year. I just got sick of all the government meddling and have been holding out hope that in November people will smarten up and elect new people with more brains than the ones we currently have in DC.

In the past year what has really changed or are things still at the same point they were a year ago. I've only been back for a week and havent really made heads or tails out of it.

Is it really worth starting the station up again? Is there still enough ways to make money to fund a station enough to make a go of it a second time or am I just shitting in the wind?
I seriously doubt a change in administration is going to make much of an impact. For one, the US Copyright Office is an independent agency staffed with career government workers, and are not inclined to make sweeping changes at the whim of the current administration. (Which, from a stable government perspective is a good thing - but that's besides the point)
On your other point, if your intent on running an internet station is for profit, then you have to treat it like a business - dedicate resources and be imaginative with how you want to bring in revenue. If you run it like a hobby, you're going to be hampered in your ability to make money. Like many indie bands looking to "make it big" - at some point, you're going to have to quit your job and go on tour.

idobi Network - http://idobi.com/
idobi Radio - http://idobiradio.com/
idobi App now available for iOS, Android and Windows Phone (http://idobi.com/app/)
idobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2008, 10:44   #305
bored_womble
Winamp's Womble
 
bored_womble's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wimbledon Common
Posts: 1,100
everyone should now be happy ...

http://www.slyck.com/story1768_Agree...rnet_Royalties

well i am sure someone will have a moan.

BW

Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.
bored_womble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2008, 13:09   #306
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
There was no conclusion made for internet radio streams, so we are still in limbo. The only things resolved were on demand content and limit use download content.

Quote:
However, in the meantime it appears the feud has been settled for interactive music services and limited download services, but the Internet radio debate remains unresolved.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2008, 13:37   #307
bored_womble
Winamp's Womble
 
bored_womble's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wimbledon Common
Posts: 1,100
i suspect with this agreement the next part will follow quite quickly.

BW

Without open minds the world will die. Open yours and correct the mistakes you are making right now.
bored_womble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2008, 17:42   #308
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
Hopefully! It has been too long already.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2008, 16:39   #309
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
A real stream can not be considered an ephemeral recording because it is never in a complete state. I guess you could set your buffer for something stupid like 2 hours and then it would be "recorded", but that is really a stretch in my mind. A 10 second RAM buffer is not a recording since when power is removed, the information is "lost".

If an application allows you to buffer to the hard disk, then that application should be brought to task, not the stream provider.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2008, 18:35   #310
SorceryKid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 294
Congress yesterday passed the "Webcaster Settlement Act of 2008", legislation which authorizes SoundExchange to continue good-faith negotiations with Webcasters for the remainder of this year in an attempt to reach a compromise regarding the latest round of digital sound recording royalties.

If a settlement is ultimately reached, the bill will codify the rates and terms for royalties applicable to sound recording copyright owners and recording artists retroactive to 2005 -- regardless of their affiliation with SoundExchange -- effectively providing a "blanket license" for the use of sound recordings within non-interactive broadcast transmissions over the Internet.

This is an extraordinary victory for our industry, and it brings us one step closer to ensuring the ultimate survival of Internet radio. The timing of this legislation is particularly fortuitous as Small Webcaster Community Initiative and its allies have recently begun pressuring SoundExchange to adopt a newly proposed "aggregator license" concept.

Currently, tens thousands of small Webcasters rely on umbrella licensing services such as Live365, SWCast Network, and Loud City for the collection and disbursement of applicable license fees on their behalf -- significantly streamlining the collection and reporting process that SoundExchange would otherwise have to endure. These and other signatories to the proposed agreement maintain that a sensible aggregator royalty rate is necessary to maintain the viability of this business model.

It is our hope that the recording industry will pursue these negotiations with at least the same vigor and enthusiasm that led to the landmark 2002 settlement.

Regards,

_________
Randall E. Krause
Executive Director
Small Webcaster Community Initiative
www.smallwebcaster.org
SorceryKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2008, 21:46   #311
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
Let's hope so, but remember that the RIAA are greedy bastards!

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2008, 11:46   #312
RFB147
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: northwest
Posts: 5
I began broadcasting on the internet back in 1996 on a station called WINR, which listed here at winamp and was one of the few that would always be at the front page of the listing. In those days, there were tons of illegal music pirating across the web via downloads and early p2p style music sharing schemes.

Internet radio that did not participate in these illegal ventures of pirating music had no problems at all. We were able to deliver legal music content from promotional only copies sent to us by the record industry and their distributors.

Now I dont care what some here will think about what I am going to say, but frankly, what screwed up internet radio for everyone these days, is all that illegal music sharing and pirating that occured in the early years of internet, and that is the primary reason why the RIAA and artists are all upset about, and is why the current hefty licensing fees are now spread out all over the broadcast industry, be it terrestrial or internet.

Basically...all that illegal music sharing and pirating numbnutz cut their own throats, as well as ours.

These licensing requirements are blanket solutions to solve a problem instigated years ago by idiots who went out and spent thousands of dollars on high speed PC's and broadband connections to throw around illegal copies of music, yet would refuse to pay 5 cents for a legit copy!

Dumb.

Now we are all paying the price.

Perhaps there will never be an easy solution, but one thing is for sure, this all stems from a single act that millions participated in, and now the blanket has been spread out and were all going to pay for those acts of the past.


Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fools that follow.



Cheers!!!!
RFB147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2008, 15:15   #313
Jkey
Forum King
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: E*arth
Posts: 3,031
Nonsense its the record companies fault for not evolving their buisness structure to keep up with changing technology
and constantly overpricing their products.

We now pay the price of their buisness mistakes and short term money grabbing vision.

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish.
Jkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2008, 16:30   #314
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
Nonsense it's the record producers letting garbage out that no one in their right mind would want to buy. Proof of point, Metalica's album that was so bad people didn't even want to steal it. Now there's affective anti piracy for you. There is so much (mainstream) content coming out, but most of it is crap, no wonder sales are so poor. The big difference is that people can often listen to the disk before they plunk down their hard earned money, and if they decide it sucks, they don't buy it.

Example... I like most of the older Portishead stuff and own the disks. Their new work came out, and I listened to the mono low bit rate streams for each song and decided I would not spend my money. That was the newest disk that I was looking forward to buying, and had I not taken the opportunity to listen to the whole thing from their website, I probably would have bought it based on the "singles" (or "A sides") that I might have heard around the radio.

This is also what makes services like the dreaded iTunes so popular, you can buy just the songs that appeal to you, and not waste money on all the rest of the disk. I have a whole stack of stuff that maybe had a soundtrack in a movie that I liked, so I bought the album only to find out that this one song is the only thing that is worth having. Must of that stuff doesn't even make it to my MP3 player in my car. So there is an example of money wasted.

Of course the flip side is that all these little independent online stations may ignore the overplayed singles, and play the "B sides" and get even more people interested in the album. Which might help to sell more units...

Wipe out radio and sales will really plummet, and soon internet radio will be as important as terrestrial radio in this scheme. How many of the commercial stations in your area have a stream? Around here it is about 9 out of 10 or maybe 13 out of 15 (I think we have 15 stations here). I think only the PBS stations have a for pay, higher quality stream.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2008, 06:23   #315
Jkey
Forum King
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: E*arth
Posts: 3,031
The producers are not blame thats silly,i remember years
ago when i got my first contract i was forced into producing
garbage by the record company so they could make money.
I left the buisness soon after.

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish.
Jkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2008, 14:06   #316
Greg_E
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,687
OK, record companies. Either way they are turning out trash and wondering why it won't sell.

Your mileage may vary!
Greg_E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th January 2009, 07:20   #317
Brutish Sailor
Major Dude
 
Brutish Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 998
Send a message via Skype™ to Brutish Sailor
broadcastlawblog.com/archives/cat-internet-radio.html

a new article from the 15'th. I found the last few articles interesting reading.

KNSJ.org 89.1 FM San Diego

Last edited by Brutish Sailor; 18th January 2009 at 07:43.
Brutish Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th February 2009, 01:22   #318
Brutish Sailor
Major Dude
 
Brutish Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 998
Send a message via Skype™ to Brutish Sailor
radioandrecords.com wrote:

By Mike Boyle

The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) and SoundExchange announced Monday (Feb. 16) a comprehensive agreement on Internet streaming rates for local radio stations that simulcast programming over the Internet or that create new stand-alone Internet stations. The agreement provides discounts on previously-set rates for 2009 and 2010 and establishes rates for 2011-2015, providing stations with an enhanced ability to serve listeners through online platforms.

Additionally, the NAB has reached separate agreements with individual record label groups that waive certain statutory format restrictions allowing, for example, certain artists to be played more often during a four hour period.

Under the agreement, rates for simulcasts or Web channels operated by local radio stations are reduced in 2009 and 2010 by approximately 16%, and then gradually increase through 2015 - from $0.0015 per streamed sound recording in 2009 to $0.0025 per stream by 2015.

The agreement was reached under the authority of the Webcaster Settlement Act of 2008 (H.R. 7080) and covers simulcasts over the Internet of all copyrighted commercially-released musical performances.

"Today's announcement provides local radio stations with the ability to enhance their local service with an online component, boosting listeners' access to music, local news and information," says NAB executive VP Dennis Wharton. "By ensuring the continued viability of Internet streaming for America's radio stations, today's agreement further strengthens the relationship between free, local radio and our 235 million weekly listeners."

"Because of the explosive growth of music on the Internet, this is good news for everyone involved in music - from artists to labels to broadcasters and to fans," SoundExchange executive director John Simson says. "It provides radio stations more opportunity to grow their on-line businesses in a stable business environment. Furthermore, it gives artists and copyright holders the opportunity to have more of their music played, while being fairly compensated, in more places as radio services expand their offerings on the Internet."

KNSJ.org 89.1 FM San Diego
Brutish Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th February 2009, 13:11   #319
chuckeh
SHOUTcast Freak
 
chuckeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NRW, Germany
Posts: 323
What does this mean exactly? Don't know the current rates in the USA and I am just interested, if the radio station are still able to pay the fees or if they now have bigger problems?
chuckeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th February 2009, 13:16   #320
dotme
Moderator
 
dotme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 4,024
The NAB agreement is only for terrestrial radio (NAB members). If you ask me, they got hosed by their own trade group. Terrestrials will end up paying about $11/month per internet listener (or slot) to SoundExchange alone - that's before other royalties and expenses.

As of this morning, there's still no official settlement with DiMA or the Small Commercial Webcasters group.
dotme is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Shoutcast > Shoutcast Discussions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump