Print 85 comment(s) - last by NYNoodle.. on Jul 23 at 10:48 AM

Increased royalty fees may force some internet radio stations to shut down

Over the last year, the online music industry has been in what many call as a major shakeup. Music artists and labels represented by SoundExchange say they are being treated unfairly, receiving less than a fair amount of money being generated by online radio stations. SoundExchange has been lobbying Congress over the last year to force online radio stations to pay for or pay higher royalties for songs played.

Working closely with Congress, SoundExchange has successfully convinced the industry that increased royalties are a necessity. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to put a stop on increased royalties. This Sunday, Internet radio stations will be slapped with a bill forcing them to pay higher royalties going forward and pay for music aired in 2006. By 2010, royalty rates will nearly triple what stations currently pay. Stations will also incur an annual fee of $500, but the annual fee hasn't been fully worked out. SoundExchange is unsure if it wants stations to pay $500 per station or per channel.

"This is just about the artists getting paid fairly. Artists and labels just want a fair share of the pie," said Richard Ades, a SoundExchange representative.

Late last month, many online stations banded together for a single day of silence, marking their stance against SoundExchange and its demands. Called "Day of Silence," the move created public awareness about how damaging the new proposed royalties could be. Despite the demonstration, SoundExchange chief executive John Simson said, the "rates are fair."

Tim Westergren, founder of Pandora, one of the largest Internet radio companies, said, although his company is able to pay for the new royalties he and his company would not go down without a fight. Pandora along with Yahoo, Rhapsody and Live365 represent the four largest Internet radio companies today. Whether large or small, all types of broadcasters will be affected. SoundExchange said it has taken this into account. Small and non-profit broadcasters will have a royalty cap of $50,000 per year -- still a very large amount.

"Nobody wins when Internet radio gets shut down, including artists who ostensibly are being represented by SoundExchange, the organization pushing for high rates. It's ironic. If SoundExchange gets their way, it means less money for musicians because people will cease to pay royalties all together," Westergren said.

Even with the cap, small broadcasters are still in distress. Michael Clark, owner of two small stations said that after Sunday, he would owe roughly $14,000 USD just for the holiday season of 2007. As for all the music that his station broadcasted during the 2006 year, Clark will owe $8000 on Sunday. One of Clark's stations already closed down because of the new changes and he was unsure of what to do after Sunday, he said.

Jake Sommers, owner of a similarly small station that plays jazz faced similar decisions and consequently closed down his station. closed on April 30th of this year when Sommers realized he would have to pay $2000 per month to keep his station of 20,000 listeners afloat.

"We never made a dime. It was a labor of love. Everything we made we put right back into radio station. It was a bunch of trumpet geeks playing music for other trumpet geeks," Sommers said.

As Patty Smyth once sang, "sometimes love just ain't enough."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Move servers
By Rebel44 on 7/13/2007 8:32:15 PM , Rating: 5
What they need to do is just to move servers from USA somewhere else and tell those greedy idiots to fuck off.

RE: Move servers
By RaisedinUS on 7/14/2007 10:40:04 AM , Rating: 5
I'm not a law expert but you still have to stream copyrighted material through US based internet providers. With this much money involved, look for providers to set up monitoring programs. They will look at all your data, sent and received for any "violations". People better wake up and see what this really means. The internet police are at the front door and turning the door knob.

RE: Move servers
By jay401 on 7/14/2007 1:22:39 PM , Rating: 2
All this horsepoop because of some greedy corporate whores. How aggravating.

RE: Move servers
By Dactyl on 7/15/2007 10:57:05 AM , Rating: 2
Greedy music industry whores.

Don't blame corporate America for a bunch of overweight, greasy Hollywood executives.

RE: Move servers
By Macungah on 7/14/2007 4:26:41 PM , Rating: 2
False. This system requires royalty from people broadcasting. It would end up like the whole online gambling debacle. Just move the servers out of state, and you cannot be touched by US law.

RE: Move servers
By RaisedinUS on 7/14/07, Rating: 0
RE: Move servers
By Sungpooz on 7/15/2007 5:04:13 AM , Rating: 2
And this will help how? Moving from one state to the other will solve nothing as all the states are in the US.

If you read his post carefully, he probably meant "out of the States "

I think he meant out the U.S. entirely.

RE: Move servers
By RaisedinUS on 7/15/2007 11:20:57 AM , Rating: 2
Not what he said and besides, how do you propose to get your stream outside of the US other than move out?
You will still be using internet based IN the US. I would think the same law would apply. One stream or 100 streams it would still break the law as it stands.

RE: Move servers
By mino on 7/17/2007 3:34:37 AM , Rating: 2
Well, in allmost every country outside of the US the term "state" represents the "country" as a wholoe not just its administrative unit. So USA is also reffered-to as a state.

Just keep in mind that this an international forum.

"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki