Comments on: RIAA vs. Public Radio – Performance Rights Act Moves Ahead

By: 2009 – A ZeroPaid Year in Review – Part 2 of 3

2009 – A ZeroPaid Year in Review – Part 2 of 3 — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:27:48 +0000

[...] were making more enemies in that respect, they were also making enemies with an old ally – public radio. One of the RIAA’s members higher ups also made the comment that nothing good ever comes out [...]

By: z

Mon, 18 May 2009 15:20:09 +0000

hmmmmm
the battle of two dinosaurs

By: Clint

Clint — Sun, 17 May 2009 15:47:02 +0000

More sinister yet is RIAA’s performance royalty tax on Internet broadcasters. That is a much larger tax and is going to drive those guys out of business – or offshore. This bill is really a battle between huge corporate radio and huge corporate labels – it should include some provisions for equilibrium or relief for the guys trying to make a go of it online.

By: Nostalgic Rumblings » RIAA vs. Public Radio - Performance Rights Act Moves Ahead

Sat, 16 May 2009 06:18:42 +0000

[...] From ZeroPaid: RIAA vs. Public Radio – Performance Rights Act Moves Ahead [...]

By: DrewWilson

DrewWilson — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:40:25 +0000

Yeah, there were similar moves done in Canada by CRIA about a year or two ago. I remember mentioning this to the station manager who seemed surprisingly cool about the record labels demanding a brand new hunk of royalty payments. The big reason he was so cool? If we played non-RIAA music, the payments would drop back down to previous royalty rates. Of course, he was still pissed off because there was a provision in the proposals to have the fees retroactive which would, IMO, effectively kill off the station because it would run up into the thousands of additional fees.

He put it to me this way (bear in mind, this was a few years ago, so don’t count on any of this being perfectly accurate), “If an artist hands us a CD, asking to play their music, then demands money for the rights to play the music on the air, then we just hand the CD back to them and say, ‘sorry, go find somewhere else to play your music’.”

But yeah, certainly, I try and make a point to play non-RIAA music on my radio show. The lawsuit campaign several years ago was enough for me to do what I can to stage a boycott of major record label music. Ever since then, the labels keep giving me more reasons to not play their material.

By: 1cooldude

1cooldude — Fri, 15 May 2009 23:48:26 +0000

@Drew; as I was reading this I kept thinking that there currently exists a pool of non-RIAA artists who would be very happy to have their material played over the airwaves. While the above content affects only American based broadcasters, I can only guess that this will eventually move into Canada. One station comes to mind CFUR is a perfect example of very little CRIA material. Cut the cancer and everything shall be fine again.

By: DrewWilson

DrewWilson — Fri, 15 May 2009 23:03:14 +0000

After all the research I’ve done, I personally hope, at the very least, an ammendment get’s put into this bill that says that if the radio stations play RIAA music, then they pay the royalty. If they play non-RIAA music, then they don’t have to pay the RIAA. At the very least, that would be fair – those that demand the money can demand it, but those that don’t demand these royalties are left out of the equasion and the broadcasters can sit down and do the math on their own.

Still, unlike previous fights the RIAA has picked in the past, there’s a lot of money and lobbying power coming from the other side of the battle so just about anything can happen between now and if/when the bill gets to Obama’s desk.

By: mountain_rage

mountain_rage — Fri, 15 May 2009 22:50:41 +0000

Hope the radio stations still opt to playing non RIAA music as a form of protest. Too bad there is a relative monopoly of stations, and the likely hood of a old fashion protest has become much slimmer.