• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

DiMA Shakes SoundExhange's Hand

W

WhiskeyRobber

"Large internet broadcasting group DiMA has now accepted a minimum, per-channel fee offer from SoundExchange. The acceptance was announced Saturday, just moments ahead of a Sunday royalty rate deadline. The accepted offer caps the $500 per-channel fee at $50,000 annually, a recoupable ceiling that addresses limitless charges for providers that dynamically create stations."

http://news.myspace.com/music/generalmusic/item/7687486
 
now it is reported a deal between dima and soundexchange is not accurate, they have a sticking point still to be resolved. in today's radio and records.com (7-17-07). i do subscribe to live 365 and hopefully they will be able to continue broadcasting on the internet.
 
Can we say "S-T-U-P-I-D" ?

I suppose those at the RIAA haven't heard of "analog", have they? As long as there's legacy audio hardware out there people are going to record whatever their want. DRM is going to slow down the technilogical inept, but those with a little background in audio and/or electronics will still be able to rip music without much fuss. Granted, analog is not digital, but if someone wants a copy of something they probably won't care about any resulting loss in quality going into one generation of analog audio.

It's another stupid point that the RIAA is going to trounce down the consumer's back. Gee, let me guess, they're going to want to stop people from taping off their FM radios ... oh wait, does anybody listen to FM radio anymore? ???

To quote Casey Kasem in his death dedication rant, " [it's] Ponderous, F'n ponderous"
 
Bill DeFelice said:
Can we say "S-T-U-P-I-D" ?

I suppose those at the RIAA haven't heard of "analog", have they? As long as there's legacy audio hardware out there people are going to record whatever their want. DRM is going to slow down the technilogical inept, but those with a little background in audio and/or electronics will still be able to rip music without much fuss. Granted, analog is not digital, but if someone wants a copy of something they probably won't care about any resulting loss in quality going into one generation of analog audio.

It's another stupid point that the RIAA is going to trounce down the consumer's back. Gee, let me guess, they're going to want to stop people from taping off their FM radios ... oh wait, does anybody listen to FM radio anymore? ???

To quote Casey Kasem in his death dedication rant, " [it's] Ponderous, F'n ponderous"
Click to expand...

Well, of course, this isn't going to stop someone from capturing a web broadcast if they really wanted to. The question is: do internet radio listeners really want to? There is no evidence that this is being done on a wide scale or that webcasting per se is having any adverse effect on record sales.

It's just another example of the RIAA and the record industry demonizing internet radio and trying to "tame" it with an unworkable solution. The record industry needs to get its own house in order and adapt to new ways of distributing music instead of setting up straw men to blame for its financial ills.

db
 
Wats the dsifference between STREAM RIPPING and someone recording from an OFF AIR station??

Nothing..... They just wanna complain and ruin something FOR NO GOOD REASON!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I thought this quote in the N.Y. Times was very appropriate to what is happening with web radio and the RIAA:

"Other musicians may think that their best chance at a livelihood is locking away their music — impossible as that is in the digital era — and demanding that fans buy everything they want to hear. But Prince is confident that his listeners will support him, if not through CD sales then at shows or through other deals."

Prince, who has long history of distain for record labels, has never been wealthier. And he has done this by putting his fans and his music first. He has also become as the article put it, "multi-platform", by exploring new ways to distribute his music (such as allowing a London newspaper to give away his CD). In this he has set a pattern for all current and future artists as they creatively find new ways to get their music heard.

Artists cannot allow the RIAA and its dog, SoundExchange, to enforce old, failing ways in which music is distributed and compensated through additional and exorbitant royalty fees nor allow record industry fears of piracy to run amok as is happening now by their insisting on DRM in webcasting. To do so is to crush the future of music awareness and distribution, internet radio.

As the Times article says in summation:

"Where the Internet truism is that information wants to be free, Prince’s corollary is that music wants to be heard."

And I say amen to that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/arts/music/22pare.html?th&emc=th

db
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom