Performance Royalty Tax

[urbanradio704]

I saw this mentioned on another post, and I want to ask the question. Are you for or against the Performance Royalty Bill? And why? I am against it because it doesn't make any sense for record companies to tax the stations that's driving record sales and making them all their money. It's a mutually beneficial relationship. It's free promotion for the artist and record company as well as beneficial to the radio station for listenership. If the already rich record companies and artists want to charge for use of 'their product' shouldn't radio also charge for promotion? I don't think it would put many stations out of business, and I do think Cathy Hughes and others have hyped it up. I can't say I wouldn't do the same, if there was something that would be a blow to my already struggling business, I would be running ads against it too. Your thoughts?

 

[Scholarm1111]

If it passes this will definitely hurt urban radio stations, particularly those not owned by the big conglomerates. The majority in U.S. House of Reps are currently opposed. It was disappointing that the Obama administration came out in favor last week.

It is too bad that many recording artists do not appreciate the promotional value of radio airplay. The door was opened when outrageous royalties were imposed for internet radio stations and streaming under the very misguided digital millenium copyright act of 1996. And the whole point of that legislation was to respond to Napster, it had nothing to do with radio originally.