Radio Program from Scratch/Organizational Help?

[radiospasm]

First off, I'm sorry this if regarding a high school radio program, but it's the closest board I could find to post this question.

I'm talking with my high school (I'm not a student, I graduated many years ago) about starting a radio program. I read previously about an organization that assists with all the legalities and paperwork that comes with this process, as far as dealing with FCC applications, etc.

Does anyone recall the name and/or website of that organization? Or, if anyone on here as PROVEN experience helping with this kind of setup, I'd like to chat. I've worked in commercial radio for about six years now (San Francisco, Sacramento, Stockton/Modesto, Fresno, up and down CA), but non-comm set-ups is not my area of expertise, and I don't want to act like it is.

If anyone can offer any assistance or insight it would be much appreciated.

Thank you.

 

[Kris_Henderson]

http://wmph.org/About/Start.aspx<P ID="signature">______________
http://wmph.org</P>

 

[Radiothis]

Have you thought about starting an internet radio station?

The most costly thing with those is getting music rights, but groups like the Intercollegiate Broadcast System (ibsradio.org) can help you with that. In today's commuter world, the only way many parents and other supporters may be able to listen is from their desks--making streaming audio a great way to broadcast.

Good luck!

 

[dkocolin]

> http://wmph.org/About/Start.aspx
>

wow... they actually suggest SAP as a viable broadcast medium? most people don't even know SAP exists, let alone what it is

 

[Kris_Henderson]

Once we migrate to DTV there will be no SAP to be had so that option will only last another few years.

Kris<P ID="signature">______________
http://wmph.org</P>

 

[mic_check]

Just got back from IBS in NYC. Here's what you're up against:

There is no filing window currently open or anticipated for noncommercial radio stations or LPFMs (there is a huge backlog of these aps). Thus, a broadcast station isn't a viable option.

Webstreaming is a good way to go if your school district is loaded on the technology side -- the IT dept. needs to dedicate a healthy supply of bandwidth if you have an on-campus streaming server. Otherwise, your IT guys can dedicate one 128K stream and one 56K stream to supply a paid host, such as Live365.com, to stream your signal. The 128K stream would be a stereo signal for broadband subscribers and the 56K would be a mono source for dial-up users. The cost isn't totally outrageous--$75/month will get you 25 synchronous streams. You can add more as you grow. Plus, to be legal, you'll need to pay music royalties. IBS member webstreaming stations pay through an organization called SoundExchange (google 'em) at a rate of $275 per year. Another $50 per year gets you out of all record keeping of songs and artists. Most schools that have web radio stations use two computers for the process--one to encode the audio and the other to send it out. If your school district has a grant writer, this is a great project to get him/her involved in. It's technology oriented, uses the web and provides all the active learning, problem solving, reach-out-and-touch-the-world learning local school boards love.

If you're in a small community, a cable-based radio station may be an option. Local cable companies are required to make available an educational access channel, but they're not required to program it. If no other school district has a deal to operate this channel or provides a lot of content, your school could work with the CATV folks to set up a school-related video message board and the audio could be the school radio station. The Utica City School District (NY) has this deal going with Adelphia Cable.

This is a cool thing if you can get it going. Find the local cutting edge kids and community-minded folks and get the buzz going. Build a ground swell of support and it'll develop a life of its own.




> First off, I'm sorry this if regarding a high school radio
> program, but it's the closest board I could find to post
> this question.
>
> I'm talking with my high school (I'm not a student, I
> graduated many years ago) about starting a radio program. I
> read previously about an organization that assists with all
> the legalities and paperwork that comes with this process,
> as far as dealing with FCC applications, etc.
>
> Does anyone recall the name and/or website of that
> organization? Or, if anyone on here as PROVEN experience
> helping with this kind of setup, I'd like to chat. I've
> worked in commercial radio for about six years now (San
> Francisco, Sacramento, Stockton/Modesto, Fresno, up and down
> CA), but non-comm set-ups is not my area of expertise, and I
> don't want to act like it is.
>
> If anyone can offer any assistance or insight it would be
> much appreciated.
>
> Thank you.
>

 

[profradio]

> Plus,
> to be legal, you'll need to pay music royalties. IBS member
> webstreaming stations pay through an organization called
> SoundExchange (google 'em) at a rate of $275 per year.
> Another $50 per year gets you out of all record keeping of
> songs and artists.

I must correct a fable perpetuated by some less-than-scrupulous folks. The sound recording license obtained from SoundExchange is a <u>statutory</u> license (e.g., provided for by federal laws passed by Congress, specifically, the DPRA, DMCA, and SWSA), available to <u>anyone</u> who qualifies and pays the fee. Contrary to the false promotional hype by some, you do not have to be a member of any particular organization to make use of the statutory license. Membership in any one organization does not qualify your station for rates better than membership in no organization at all.

Trust me ... I was a participant in the negotiations to arrive at the present alternative royalty system, <u>throughout</u> those negotiations. The organization trying to now make a claim on the negotiated settlement joined the process <u>only very late</u> in the process. Again, I was there.

For the record, the sound recording license for a "Noncommercial Educational Entity" is $250 per year for campuses with an enrollment less than 10,000 students, $500 annually for campuses with 10,000 or more students. An additional recordkeeping fee of $25 per year applies in each case (a total of $275 or $525, respectively). As we negotiated we deliberately included high schools within the definition of the "NEE." These rates technically expired at the end of the calendar year 2005, but continue until new statutory rates are set by the Copyright Royalty Board, or a new negotiated settlement is reached. The arbitration of the new rates is presently ongoing (a process in which I am again personally participating). At the earliest, don’t expect the new rates to be set until much later this year. Once determined, the new rates will be retroactive.

Additional performance royalties are due for the underlying musical works, payable to ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. For most college and university campuses, these royalties are covered by new campus agreements with the performance rights societies (your mileage may vary). Because the original question involved a proposed high school station, it is much less likely that such an agreement is already in place in that case, and plans should include royalties to those organizations.

Forgive me if I come across as a bit preachy; it just really bugs me when an organization outright lies to the very constituents it is supposed to be helping.

 

[mic_check]

My intent was not to perpetuate a fable. Nor, did I. As my original post stated, I had just returned from the IBS convention. I only pointed out that "IBS member webstreaming stations" pay a particular rate (the amount I stated was incorrect--sorry) because that was my frame of reference. I didn't say it was an exclusive deal nor was that implied. College Broadcasters, Inc. probably has the same deal, but I wasn't at their convention. Good thing you added the stuff about ASCAP, SESAC and BMI, too.




> > Plus,
> > to be legal, you'll need to pay music royalties. IBS
> member
> > webstreaming stations pay through an organization called
> > SoundExchange (google 'em) at a rate of $275 per year.
> > Another $50 per year gets you out of all record keeping of
>
> > songs and artists.
>
> I must correct a fable perpetuated by some
> less-than-scrupulous folks. The sound recording license
> obtained from SoundExchange is a statutory license (e.g.,
> provided for by federal laws passed by Congress,
> specifically, the DPRA, DMCA, and SWSA), available to anyone
> who qualifies and pays the fee. Contrary to the false
> promotional hype by some, you do not have to be a member of
> any particular organization to make use of the statutory
> license. Membership in any one organization does not
> qualify your station for rates better than membership in no
> organization at all.
>
> Trust me ... I was a participant in the negotiations to
> arrive at the present alternative royalty system, throughout
> those negotiations. The organization trying to now make a
> claim on the negotiated settlement joined the process only
> very late in the process. Again, I was there.
>
> For the record, the sound recording license for a
> "Noncommercial Educational Entity" is $250 per year for
> campuses with an enrollment less than 10,000 students, $500
> annually for campuses with 10,000 or more students. An
> additional recordkeeping fee of $25 per year applies in each
> case (a total of $275 or $525, respectively). As we
> negotiated we deliberately included high schools within the
> definition of the "NEE." These rates technically expired at
> the end of the calendar year 2005, but continue until new
> statutory rates are set by the Copyright Royalty Board, or a
> new negotiated settlement is reached. The arbitration of
> the new rates is presently ongoing (a process in which I am
> again personally participating). At the earliest, don’t
> expect the new rates to be set until much later this year.
> Once determined, the new rates will be retroactive.
>
> Additional performance royalties are due for the underlying
> musical works, payable to ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. For most
> college and university campuses, these royalties are covered
> by new campus agreements with the performance rights
> societies (your mileage may vary). Because the original
> question involved a proposed high school station, it is much
> less likely that such an agreement is already in place in
> that case, and plans should include royalties to those
> organizations.
>
> Forgive me if I come across as a bit preachy; it just really
> bugs me when an organization outright lies to the very
> constituents it is supposed to be helping.
>

 

[profradio]

> My intent was not to perpetuate a fable. Nor, did I. As my
> original post stated, I had just returned from the IBS
> convention. I only pointed out that "IBS member
> webstreaming stations" pay a particular rate (the amount I
> stated was incorrect--sorry) because that was my frame of
> reference. I didn't say it was an exclusive deal nor was
> that implied. College Broadcasters, Inc. probably has the
> same deal, but I wasn't at their convention. Good thing you
> added the stuff about ASCAP, SESAC and BMI, too.

I did not intend to shoot you, the messenger; I'm sure you were accurately retelling what you recall being told. My problem is that what you were told was a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth. I've previously heard (and read) that same misrepresentation too many times. It offends me greatly when a party, for their own benefit, attempts to take full credit for work that is the product of the efforts of several. I have had extensive direct conversation with the person responsible for this exaggeration, obviously to no avail.

There is no "deal" for any organization or its members; the statutory and SWSA rates apply to any station meeting the qualifications, which do not include membership in <u>any</u> organization. Likewise, I am not promoting any organization -- I intentionally mention none. As it happens, our station is a member of both organizations you reference.

The precise language defining the qualifications for a student station to be eligible for the SWSA rates is as follows:

"An 'NEE' or 'Noncommercial Educational Entity' is a Noncommercial Webcaster that is directly operated by, or is affiliated with and officially sanctioned by, and the digital audio transmission operations of which are, during the course of the year, staffed substantially by students enrolled at, a domestically accredited primary or secondary school, college, university or other post-secondary degree-granting educational institution, but that is not a "public broadcasting entity" (as defined in 17 U.S.C. 118(g)) qualified to receive funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting pursuant to the criteria set forth in 47 U.S.C. 396."

... and ...

"The term 'Noncommercial Webcaster' shall have the meaning given in 17 U.S.C.
114(f)(5)(E)(i) (as added by the Small Webcaster Settlement Act of 2002)."

Again, note that there is absolutely no reference in the above to any membership requirement; this is not a "deal" for IBS, CBI, NCAA, DNC, or AOL members! Don't buy the bunk that's being sold to you.

 

[OgOgglby]

Someone posted:
"Another $50 per year gets you out of all record keeping of songs and artists."

Profradio: Since you know this whole story...I thought I read in the last statement from the copyright folks that they knew stations were not tracking the 6-8 fields of data required for each song, and that this was unacceptable. Does the extra fee really eliminate the need for tracking for a large non-CPB station?

 

[profradio]

> Someone posted:
> "Another $50 per year gets you out of all record keeping of
> songs and artists."
>
> Profradio: Since you know this whole story...I thought I
> read in the last statement from the copyright folks that
> they knew stations were not tracking the 6-8 fields of data
> required for each song, and that this was unacceptable. Does
> the extra fee really eliminate the need for tracking for a
> large non-CPB station?

Yes, as long as the SWSA agreement remains in place, the $25 recordkeeping fee replaces entirely the burden on Noncommercial Educational Entities ("NEE"s) for recordkeeping. A "NEE" is basically any Webcast operated by students at an educational institution, excluding any station eligible for funding by CPB.

The Copyright Office has adopted rules specifying the data <u>other</u> stations will be expected to report, but has not yet issued rules on the <u>format</u> that this information will be required to be submitted to SoundExchange. Unless something else happens along the way, NEEs will eventually be required to submit the same reports as everyone else.

Again, as I have posted previously, the SWSA rates and terms officially expired at the end of the calendar year 2005. Because relplacement rates and terms have yet to be determined, the SWSA rates carry forward on an interim basis for NEEs. Once rates are established for the years 2006-2010, those rates (and terms, such as recordkeeping) will be retroactive to the beginning of 2006.

It's still much too early to predict the outcome of the current arbitration. The intitial discovery process is just wrapping up and several motions remain to be ruled on by the Copyright Royalty Board. Direct Case hearings have been proposed for early May, with rebuttal hearings in mid-August. Any ruling by the CRB would come after that.

 

[TPO]

If a station is streaming in-house and has a license from SoundExchange and is paying the $25 fee to eliminate recordkeeping, does that statioin still have to post the song title and artist information on their web site as spelled out in the SoundExchange Non-CPB, educational station license agreement?

 

[profradio]

> If a station is streaming in-house and has a license from
> SoundExchange and is paying the $25 fee to eliminate
> recordkeeping, does that statioin still have to post the
> song title and artist information on their web site as
> spelled out in the SoundExchange Non-CPB, educational
> station license agreement?

The requirement for simultaneous text display is contained in the <u>statute</u>. See 17 U.S.C. 114(d)(2)(C)(ix). The law requires simultaneous display of the song title, the artist, <u>and</u> the album title. This requirement is not altered by the SWSA settlement with SoundExchange.

The simultaneous display is a separate issue from the recordkeeping and reporting requirements (and the recordkeeping fee under the SWSA agreement). SoundExchange did not have the authority under the SWSA to negotiate the statutory display requirement.

If you do not comply with this condition, you are technically not eligible for the statutory license, including the version under the SWSA. Even if you pay the fee, if you do not provide the text display you could be sued for infringement.

To date, I am not aware of any action taken to enforce this provision, though I am certainly <u>not</u> recommending violating the law.

Here's the full text of the relevant clause in the statute:

"(ix) the transmitting entity identifies in textual data the sound recording during, but not before, the time it is performed, including the title of the sound recording, the title of the phonorecord embodying such sound recording, if any, and the featured recording artist, in a manner to permit it to be displayed to the transmission recipient by the device or technology intended for receiving the service provided by the transmitting entity, except that the obligation in this clause shall not take effect until 1 year after the date of the enactment of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and shall not apply in the case of a retransmission of a broadcast transmission by a transmitting entity that does not have the right or ability to control the programming of the broadcast transmission, or in the case in which devices or technology intended for receiving the service provided by the transmitting entity that have the capability to display such textual data are not common in the marketplace."