RIAA MAKING ATTEMPTED MONEY-GRAB FROM RADIO STATIONS - Listen to WJTO

[JIBGUY]

The Recording Industry Association of America, representing most if not all the record labels doing business in America, is trying to push a bill thru Congress (HR 848) to make USA radio stations pay anywhere between $1-billion and $7-billion to them (in disguise of helping the artists). (On average, that's about $275,000.00 per station; but there will be tiers). Both WJIB-740 (Boston) and WJTO-730 (Coastal Maine) are airing short announcements at the top of EVERY hour, giving two web addresses:
www.noperformacetax.org and www.freeradioalliance.org
WJIB & WJTO will also air a 20-minute speech "13&1/2 Reasons why stations should not have to pay record companies". WJIB: Wednesday & Saturday eve 7 PM. WJTO: Wednesday and Saturday eve 6:30 PM.
Did you know that at least 71% of all music played, downloaded, sold in America is now owned by foreign-owned record labels? Therefore this bill in Congress, which more Congresspeople have said they are in favor of, than not, has a chance of passing, and will be siphoning money from Americans (station owners) to Japan, Germany, France & England.
This bill would give 50% to the record companies and the other 50% to artists (after "administrative costs" to the record companies for distribution). That means the top-sellers will get more $$$ but one-hit wonders or even two-hit wonders will likely see close to nothing.
Furthermore, take a look at how much the record companies are "concerned" about their artists... Alannah Miles had that multi-million seller "Black Velvet" in the late 80's. It's been played, downloaded a lot since then. What did Alannah make from that hit record? ZERO!!!! Not one penny!

 

[MassMusicMan]

Ooh, the sweet smell of desperation. Notice how this subject didn't come up before the advent of file-sharing and MySpace. Now that the record bigwigs are living a life of semi-luxury (thank you, South Park), they need to make a cash grab from radio.

Guess what, record industry...radio stations don't make shit for money. You're Dr. Evil seeking a ransom that doesn't exist in any reality. Do the world a favor and fail already.

 

[JIBGUY]

One of those links doesn't work above, due to my typo.

It should be www.noperformancetax.org

Thanks to Dan Strassberg who pointed this out.

---BB

 

[Mainedude2007]

So where is this bill in the process? Still in committee?

 

[Biff Barfington]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't radio stations already paying licensing fees to ASCAP, BMI, SESAC , etc? Those payments are alleged to go to the artists, so where's the beef?

 

[Ms_Milk_Maid_Mary]

BB Sweetie, :-* those fees paid are for songwriters. RIAA is pushing a performance tax. So the performer will get paid for their performance....thus D-bags like Bono will continue to cash in years after their concert and record sales tank.


Ms. Mary

 

[Biff Barfington]

[i]Of course; silly me. Wouldn't want the genius who penned "....Baby One More Time" to receive short shrift for his Herculean efforts.[/i]

 

[Zeb Norris]

The publishing industry pre-dates the recording industry. So the publishers set up a good deal at the outset.

At the outset of recorded music being played on the radio the labels gave their music to radio in order to get it played. And even in today's diversified media environment radio play strongly correlates with sales. This is why labels spend so much money on their promotions departments, which largely promote music TO radio. It is also why the labels have such a long history of using payola to influence airplay.

Artists should be fairly compensated for their work. But this bill doesn't really do anything to insure that. It will result in taxpayer money going to foreign companies via payments from public stations, has numerous structural flaws which oddly all benefit the labels, and leaves the distribution of the funds to the labels, who have been sued by their own artists over the fair distribution of revenue too many times to mention.

 

[magnadan]

First of all, let's get the wording correct. It's not a TAX. It's a fee. Using the word tax is a cheap way to get people to be against the proposal without even knowing what it is. Does radio pay a "tax" to air Rush? Do they pay a "tax" to air Red Sox games? No. They pay a fee for the broadcast rights. Can any station that decides airing Rush would be a good way to make some money just pick up the satellite feed? Can a PD just say, "You know, those Sox broadcasts are doing well. I'll broadcast them too."? No. The content in those broadcasts is copyrighted and no one has the right to broadcast them without permission.

A record label owns the copyright on the recordings that radio plays. If a station is to make money using those copyrighted recordings, they should pay the fee just as they do for the Sox games.

One of the main arguements against the fee is that the airing of the music is free publicity and promotion for the artist and the label which leads to sales. That may be true for new music. Both radio and records make money from the airing of new music. But radio and Rush make money together, yet radio still has to pay for the rights. Technically, airing Sox games can promote the sales of Sox tix, but the Sox aren't letting just anyone broadcast those games.

What about classic rock and oldies? I don't think that an oldies station is driving huge sales of Hermans' Hermits cds. Radio uses those songs, generates cash for them and doesn't compensate the owner of those songs. That's not right.

 

[JIBGUY]

A record label owns the copyright on the recordings that radio plays. If a station is to make money using those copyrighted recordings, they should pay the fee just as they do for the Sox games. - What about classic rock and oldies? I don't think that an oldies station is driving huge sales of Hermans' Hermits cds. Radio uses those songs, generates cash for them and doesn't compensate the owner of those songs. That's not right.

Apples and oranges, you are comparing, Magnadan. Airing Red Sox games on radio doesn't BRING people to the (overpriced) ballparks. In fact, it may lessen attendance. Radio does cause record sales to happen, period. - And yes, Herman's Hermits CD's sell because oldies station play them. I can tell you that over the years, thousands of people have asked what song I'm playing (on WJIB and WJTO) and they almost always say "I want to buy it" or "I want to download it (legally)". You'ld have to be in my shoes to experience this. Please take my word for it. Even when I play album tracks of standard type artists, that most other stations have never played, the audience wants to buy them too. - I'm in touch with my audience... they write me.... as I have been giving my email address over the air EVERY hour of every day, with few exceptions, over the past 5 years.

However, you are very correct that "tax" is a poor choice of wording. I would have thought that the NAB was smarter than that. I have just registered domain "www.bitethehandthatfeeds.org", and I have just offered it free to the NAB. -which is better than "www.noperformancetax.org". You're right... "tax" makes people think its like a 5% sales tax, or federal excise tax on tires, but in reality, the RIAA/MusicFirst wants an average of 35% of all stations' revenues! Not profits, but gross revenues! That's a lot more than what we envision as "tax".