Artists and labels seek royalties from radio

[CBusDave]

WASHINGTON — With CD sales tumbling, record companies and musicians are looking at a new potential pot of money: royalties from broadcast radio stations.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/la-fi-radio21may21,1,1028211.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true

My opinion, if this goes through the radio industry will be changed dramatically. They already pay a good chunk of change to publishers, adding more on top of that will cripple revenues. The RIAA first attacked their internet streams and they are close to shutting down most internet radio due to prohibitive costs and next they tackle broadcast? Not to say I don't think artists deserve it because I think they do, I just don't see how the radio stations will be able to afford it. Do artists know how little most radio station employees get paid?

 

[xiradiodotcom]

They've been charging internet-only radio these fees for years. Now they want us to pay more than triple what they get today in an industry where breaking even is good. (http://www.savenetradio.org) It was only a matter of time before they came after terrestrial. They are releasing more and more crap, less people are buying, and it's all the internet's fault. riiiight...

 

[Radioboy989]

The retail music industry is dying...again?
I wonder if there are any Jacksons left? ???

 

[jorr]

As another person wrote somewhere else... The record industry should be paying radio stations to play their music! If it was not for airplay, most of these bands would never take off. Radio is what gives the record industry life.

 

[Radioboy989]

jorr-

Don't you hate those silly payola rules!

 

[KevinFodor]

The new rules for streaming, for both internet radio and terrestrial, are beyond absurd. If allowed to be put into place, the greed of the copyright board will force all streaming to stop.

As I understand these rules, the licensing fees amount to 19 cents per song per listener. If you assumed 1000 listeners to a stream, it would cost the station over 24 million dollars a year for licensing rights to stream.

Now, we see the artists saying that, on top of this, they want their own piece of the pie. What a joke.

Has it ever occured to these people that radio airplay is one of the reasons their CD's and downloads sell?

Go ahead! Go through with your plans! Radio should respond by sending every act on our playlists a bill based upon the top of the card rate for a 4 minute, 30 second commercial (based on the time of each song)
billable for each time the song played.

After all, it's only "fair".

 

[FromTheSide]

Greed, Greed, and more Greed....

Oil Companies, Record companies, politicians, doesn't seem to matter. Anything to steal more money from the undeserving middle class.

Sorry, this whining about money came after I watched gas prices go from $3.09 to $3.49 for no good reason. (Don't bother trying to convince me otherwise, you lose that argument before the electricity runs from your brain to your fingertips)

 

[phatdaddy]

Perhaps if one or more of you are artists you can reply to a question which has bugged me for a long time. I'm not trying to push anyone's buttons or anything but honestly want to know;
If you write and/or record a song, why should you be entitled to payment for performing that particular function for the rest of your life? Yes, it's true that you have a certain amount of skill and creativity involved in performing that piece of music but I don't see how that is any different than me using my creativity in diagnosing a failed circuit or circuits in a transmitter at 3 AM on a cold snowy night, then using my skills with a soldering iron and small hand tools to get the rig back on the air. Nobody is about to pay me a nickel for each hour that tranny runs after I work my magic on it. I get my hourly wage and that's the end of it. Why should I continue to pay some artist each time I play a song that he recorded 30 years ago? Don't forget that the artist was already paid once when the song was first released and everybody went out and bought a copy. Kinda sounds to me like artists and the RIAA and other parasites that prey on them have a sweet racket going with the politicians and copyright office.

 

[xiradiodotcom]

I get my hourly wage and that's the end of it. Why should I continue to pay some artist each time I play a song that he recorded 30 years ago? Don't forget that the artist was already paid once when the song was first released and everybody went out and bought a copy.

Interesting point, phatdaddy. The funny thing is that internet radio is willing to pay fees, as has been done for quite a few years, but at a fair rate. They think more money from the places they can control, (ie not CD sales) will help them survive. They are coming to us and now terrestrial radio to fix a problem we didn't create. When all the "free" promotion goes away, we'll see where they stand.

 

[RealCountryPD]

Most interesting is the difference in fees between what the writers are paid..and what ASCAP and BMI take in. I've talked to a number of writers and performers who believe radio pays about 6-7 cents per each time a song is played.

They are STUNNED...and I think many don't believe, that the real number per play in mid-major market terrestrial radio today is about $5 PER SPIN.

The racket is really the ASCAP/BMI people. They take in HUGE dollars...and pay out little while rewarding their execs with huge bonuses and perks.

You can talk about internet fees being unfair under the new guidelines all you want. When internet and satellite pay anything approaching radio today, then I'll listen to the argument.

 

[xiradiodotcom]

They are STUNNED...and I think many don't believe, that the real number per play in mid-major market terrestrial radio today is about $5 PER SPIN.

You can talk about internet fees being unfair under the new guidelines all you want. When internet and satellite pay anything approaching radio today, then I'll listen to the argument.

Internet radio has to pay BMI/ASCAP as well as SoundExchange. At your $5 per spin example, internet radio would hit that with the new SoundExchange rates alone at just over 2600 listeners. I'm sure your FM audience is much larger than that. Not to mention FM plays around half the number of songs in an hour.

$5 / $.0019 = 2631.6 Listeners per song

http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/030207/index.shtml

 

[Shelloutfalter]

Typical whining from the crooks at RIAA/BMI/ASCAP...

Radio sells artists, period! I say pay their fee increase, then send them a bill for promotional services rendered.

 

[CBusDave]

Actually what I would like to see happen is radio stations not fighting the fees and then stop playing RIAA artist recordings. The artists will stop getting airplay period and then where will they be?

http://www.riaaradar.com/zeitgeist.asp

I'm sure there are plenty of acceptable music available by artists not tethered to the RIAA and radio could just build them up instead. As everyone has pointed out, radio makes the artist. People will listen to good music.