RSS
Add to Chrome
RIAA War With Webcasters Really a War on Indie Artists and Labels?

RIAA War With Webcasters Really a War on Indie Artists and Labels?

56% of the music they play, and some 70% of all the unique songs played were from independent artists and labels meaning they will soon lose an important means of reaching the masses.

Live365 Inc. recently completed a study of its 2006 Internet radio broadcasts which revealed that nearly 56% of its broadcast music comes from independent artists and labels and not major record labels. This statistic underscores how Internet radio helps promote new, emerging artists while also expanding musical diversity as the AM/FM radio industry consolidates station ownership and play formats.

The Live365 study further showed that well over 70% of all the unique songs played were from independent artists and labels versus the four major music labels.

In the ongoing war between the RIAA and internet radio webcasters over its so far successful bid to jack up the the royalty rates webcasters must pay for playing copyrighted content, a new study released by Live365 paints an interesting picture of what may really be going on.

The study shows that a mere 44% of music played by internet radio webcasters belongs to the major music labels while a majority 56% belongs to independent labels unaffiliated with the RIAA.

This is in stark contrast to the fact that a mere 13% of music played on terrestrial radio comes from independent music labels.

So why all the fuss from the RIAA?

The RIAA has successfully lobbied the Copyright Royalty Board to jack up the royalty rates RETROACTIVELY to January of 2006, in fact doubling the per-play rate by 2010, which is certain to close down a sizable number of small and medium-sized webcasters already struggling to make ends meet.

What this means is that the only real outlet available to hear independent music is cut off for a number of people and therefore makes it even harder for these independent, and usually struggling, artists to get their music heard and reach the masses.

If terrestrial radio is barely playing Indie music, and with these webcasters now being effectively shut down, it will almost certainly guarantee that already struggling music artists will be the big losers in all of this because many will no longer be able to hear and thus buy their albums. One could surmise that the RIAA is actually putting music artists out of work instead of trying to feed them.

Mark Lam, CEO of Live365 pointed out: “Only 10-13% of AM/FM music is from independent artists and labels so we spin FOUR times as much indie music as AM/FM. Our 10,000 DJ’s are opening up the diverse spectrum of musical genres and artists while AM/FM program formats narrow it. I see this statistic as a genuine reflection of what music DJ’s will play when the choice is driven by what people like rather than profits.”

Lam continues:

Clearly, Internet radio clears away a major hurdle for musicians to be heard. With the continued double-digit growth in Internet radio listenership, hopefully more and more songwriters and musicians will be able to use Internet radio to promote their creative works and generate income. That is what Internet radio is all about: bringing together artists and fans using a ubiquitous radio medium.

Now whether Live365 represents an actual slice of webcasters as a whole is unable to be determined but, considering the large number of webcasters it represents its findings can’t be taken for granted.

Moreover, once again the RIAA will have managed to kill off another important source of finding new music. First they killed record stores by allowing Wal-Mart and others to sell CDs as “loss leaders” at prices almost half of what music stores were abel to charge. Then rather than embrace digital music distribution back in 1999 with Napster, it fought it tooth and nail until it ran out of both teeth and nails. Lastly, it began a campaign to get every last nickel and dime in royalty fees it could find by sending letters to coffeehouses, barber shops, hair salons, and then by seeking to increase the royalties paid by both radio and web broadcasters.

Without a place to hear new music where does the RIAA expect them to go? With fewer terrestrial radio options thanks to corporate homogenization of radio playlists, and now the crackdown on indie-spinning webcsaters, where is the public to go to hear new artists and albums?

One word – P2P.

Who knew the RIAA could find new ways to muck things up for the music world but, by jove they have.

Jared Moya
I've been interested in P2P since the early, high-flying days of Napster and KaZaA. I believe that analog copyright laws are ill-suited to the digital age, and that art and culture shouldn't be subject to the whims of international entertainment industry conglomerates. Twitter | Google Plus
meyou123
meyou123

It would not suprise me at all to find out that THIS is the reason the major labels are wanting such STUPID fees for webcasting enforced! I hope someone can bring this into a courtroom....mabye they can show the difference to a judge. Because it seems like it is giving an unfair advantage to the major labels so that they can have more major label stuff on webcasting...which would only pollute it with junk music like regular radio is.

mountain_rage
mountain_rage

I already knew that was a major reason for the enforcement if it wasn't they would of just asked for requested content to be charged. Why would they want other labels to profit from their push. Its really not that hard to see that this was a big motivator for the law. If only politicians had foresight these days...

Zoness
Zoness

There going to force the entire music listening population on to p2p networks eventually exactly what they don't want. Yeah this is all totally stupid I agree but with all of this bad work the RIAA has they are eventually going to implode....someday....

du2vye
du2vye

This is a huge story and it's long overdue. RIAA claims to "represent 90% of the music sold in the U.S." which is accepted as fact. The fact is most musicians do REGISTER with the RIAA for royalties - but that does not equal REPRESENTATION such as a label does. This article successfully shows this debate is not about price - com'on would so many people pluck down $300 - $600 for players if it was just about the cost? But this whole thing is about CONTROLLING the marketplace i.e. what you and I have access to and listen to. The L.A. Times published an article about a study done in Canada which showed only 25% of piracy was using P2P networks and it was a small drop in the bucket used by people who didn't have a strong sales record in the marketplace anyway. Get real - how many albums can a college kid afford? When I was in school the most anyone had were maybe 5 - 10 at any time. And those were HEAVILY traded. That's why the best used record stores were around universities (which the RIAA would also like to stop). This is so stupid. Just the idea that downloading a song could be considered equal to a violent crime and a felony or has "terrorist" roots is showing how gullible and silly a greedy congress can be. RIAA's copyright actions are laying the ground work for the way all individually created content will be handled outside of the traditional business model - including films artwork and software. Just stopping RIAA is not enough. The laws need to change.



VyprVPN Personal VPN lets you browse securely