SoundExchange illegally lobbying Congress

[radiookc]

Perhaps I should have used the word performers. My point still stands.

Radio doesn't make money from playing songs. There is no direct connection between playing a song and taking in money. So your point doesn't apply.

Really?

So, if (insert music radio station calls here) plays commercials on it's music station that recieves ratings or is marketed as a (insert format here) station, the music does not matter and is not responsible for you having a product to sell?

No disrespect meant, but unless you are newstalk or running OTR.....seriously???

Here is my take. Compare your song to a episode of "Seinfeld". You create the program for the network and your likeness and work
is used to generate cash for a network. Sure, you are paid a fee for your network appearence. You didnt write anything. You didnt direct.
You were an actor. Now the production company/networks sell the show with you in it in syndication all over the world. And on Blu-ray.
And netflix downloads.

The "Performer" needs to me included in the mix when money is made and collected.

To say someone like ......Willie Nelson can not make money on his performance (not songwriting royalties) 20 years later when someone else is? Wrong.


Chris
www.radiookc.com

 

[TheBigA]

So, if (insert music radio station calls here) plays commercials on it's music station that recieves ratings or is marketed as a (insert format here) station, the music does not matter and is not responsible for you having a product to sell?

First of all, the radio stations PAY for the music. The fact that the billions only go to writers and publishers isn't the radio station's fault. So don't act like these stations get music for free. They don't. If performers and labels have a beef, it's with the greedy songwriters and publishers. Not radio.

Second of all, music is just one aspect of running a radio station. Just playing music is no guarantee of ratings, listeners, or advertisers. There are other elements that surround the music that differentiate one station from another. In general, music doesn't matter. Certain specific music matters. Arriving at that music that matters is a skill.

The "Performer" needs to me included in the mix when money is made and collected.

We all know the deal when we get our job. The performers have never been paid by radio in this country. That's the way it is. You know the rules when you take the job. The solution is to learn how to write songs, and tour a lot. The performer is under contract to the label. Not a radio station. The radio station can't ask performers to make sales calls for them. The label can. Paying the performer is the label's job. They screwed up. Not radio's problem.

 

[listener-in]

Perhaps I should have used the word performers. My point still stands.

Radio doesn't make money from playing songs. There is no direct connection between playing a song and taking in money. So your point doesn't apply.

Better late than never, but that's a specious argument. If radio is in business to make money, and playing songs is a vehicle for that purpose, then there's a connection. Doesn't matter whether it's direct or not, it's a link in the chain.

 

[TheBigA]

If radio is in business to make money, and playing songs is a vehicle for that purpose, then there's a connection. Doesn't matter whether it's direct or not, it's a link in the chain.

But the key point is radio PAYS for the songs. What it doesn't pay for is the artists who sing them. Radio gives those artists free publicity. And you can see the difference in income between artists who get airplay, and those who don't.

What this new royalty would do is allow the artists to double dip: To make money from the fame they achieve by airplay, and to also get a direct cash payment. That's unfair.

 

[Casey]

Really?

The "Performer" needs to me included in the mix when money is made and collected.

To say someone like ......Willie Nelson can not make money on his performance (not songwriting royalties) 20 years later when someone else is? Wrong.

Chris
www.radiookc.com

The easiest thing for performers to do, is to demand radio pays them money. It is also the worst answer to a problem beyond the scope of radio. The problem isn't that radio is not paying enough royalties, it is that radio is paying royalties to the wrong people. Before artists demand new royalties, they should check to see what radio is already paying. Radio already pays royalties. Tacking on more royalties will only avoid the problem that labels and song writers take too much of the money. If artists don't like it, they can settle it with those already getting paid. If they don't want to do that, then they can write their own songs and work for their own label. As TheBigA said, this is not radio's problem. It is the music industries problem.

Radio is a promotional tool, not a competitor to music purchases. There is no doubt that some people listen to the radio instead of buying music. There is 100% certainty that if radio never existed, people would never have heard most of that music in the first place. So does it really make sense to charge more money to those who promote you? In the real world it sure doesn't. In performers mind's, their music is gold. But gold or not, in the real world, sometimes you have to make sacrifices to get a bigger pot of gold.

And it is time artists really took the time to understand that their music is not meant to be an endless retirement fund. Creating a three minute song should not create endless royalties. Copyrights are not patents and they should not be treated as such. Charging someone for playing music, which is completely immaterial and non-innovative (doesn't better society) is beyond what the performers and song writers deserve. Performers can make money off touring, interviews, merchandise, downloads, and selling albums. If they can't survive on that, then they need to change their act or perhaps it is time for them to get a second job like the rest of the world.

Further more, Blu-ray and Netflix streams for Seinfeld have nothing to do with radio. They are related to CD sales and Spotify streams, not radio.