evil_gop_liars Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Congress considers bill to make radio "pay to play" Radio has always had a strange exemption under US law: it doesn't need to pay the performers of the music it plays. Internet radio needs to pay. Satellite radio needs to pay. Digital music stations transmitted over cable lines have to pay. But not radio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Thank you Nancy Pelosi! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Seems like a ridiculous set up to me. It would be interesting to hear the radio industry's rationale for keeping it the way it is. They fought pretty hard to make Internet radio and satellite radio pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCharger Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Does regular radio even play music? All I ever hear are commercials and talk shows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Thank you Wolfman Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Seems like a ridiculous set up to me. It would be interesting to hear the radio industry's rationale for keeping it the way it is. They fought pretty hard to make Internet radio and satellite radio pay. talk about coming back to bite you in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 I can only assume that if radio had to pay performers like everyone else it would cripple their already antiquated business model. Probably for the best, as most Clear Channel stations suck ass anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 I can only assume that if radio had to pay performers like everyone else it would cripple their already antiquated business model. Probably for the best, as most Clear Channel stations suck ass anyways. wurd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF409ers Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 (edited) This is not being exlpained clearly. Radio stations do pay "artists" for the music they play. It is called a performance rights license and is collected by organizations such as ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC and paid to the owner of the music's "underlying composition". Most of the time the composition is the property of the artist / writer. This new law has to do with paying the copyright owner of the "master recording" a performnace rights fee as well. The owner of a songs recording is usually owned by the record label and not the artist unless the artist has been around awhile and "produces" their own music. The master recordings are for the most part the only copyright ownership record labels own and may exploit, by manufacturing and distributing records. Since the beginnig of radio, broadcast companies have only had to pay a performance right royalty for a songs composition and not for the recorded version of it. With the advent of the digital age, master recording owners fought to be allowed to collect a performance rights royalty over digital transmissions as well as the composition owner being able to collect for the composition as they always have. Since the rise of broadband technology, the mp3, etc the business model for the labels has gone down the drain. They are losing there monopoly on M&D and their business model is changing with regards to marketing music and record sales. For many, many years, labels could almost predict record sales based on radio spins, this is no longer the case. They are now trying to figure out anyway they can make a buck and look to "charge" radio stations for playing "their" music when it used to be the other way around, well sort of, but that is a whole other topic. Radio stations have always played a huge role as the marketing outlet for music and it was always a beneficial role for both label and station, now it is becoming one sided. The labels today have no one but themselves to blame for losing money left and right, greed and ego has been their biggest downfall. I probably did not help to clarify this at all but I wanted to point out that this move does not really benefit the artists as a whole as much as the labels. Artists also get paid a mechanical royalty from labels for every song / composition that is reproduced and sold, that is what the Harry Fox Agency does. Edited December 21, 2007 by SF409ers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 blah blah blah Whatever you say m4m21g Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Whatever you say m4m21g hate to do it but Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.