HR848 : Performance Rights Tax


Reply
  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
 
Topic Tools Search this Thread
ThePriestess is online now ThePriestess Post #1  June 14,2009, 6:36pm
ThePriestess's Avatar

It's a glow-in-the-dark compass ring, so you don't get lost.

Sage

Joined: Apr 2008

Canadian POW held in Florida

Posts: 16,023

See profile

I've heard some mention of this proposed legislation recently and am trying to find some good information regardings the reasoning/justification and associated issues behind it.

I'm all for artists being adequately compensated for their contributions, but I'm uncertain about this legislation because in a large way radio is the mechanism by which artists become known ... it's very rare for me to purchase music I didn't first hear on radio.

And I'm confused why there would be a need for legislation at all ... are the labels not capable of enforcing their own fee structure for the use of their copyrighted material?
 
  Reply With Quote
dito is offline dito Post #2  June 15,2009, 7:22am
dito's Avatar

Veteran

Joined: Dec 2008

Colorado

Posts: 1,308

See profile

Simply amazing. Unfortunately I am not surprised by anything Washington does anymore
 
  Reply With Quote
ThePriestess is online now ThePriestess Post #3  June 15,2009, 10:27am
ThePriestess's Avatar

It's a glow-in-the-dark compass ring, so you don't get lost.

Sage

Joined: Apr 2008

Canadian POW held in Florida

Posts: 16,023

See profile

dito wrote :
Simply amazing. Unfortunately I am not surprised by anything Washington does anymore
Doesn't seem to be stirring up much here ... I guess the topic isn't controversial enough =(
 
  Reply With Quote
dito is offline dito Post #4  June 15,2009, 11:45am
dito's Avatar

Veteran

Joined: Dec 2008

Colorado

Posts: 1,308

See profile

ThePriestess wrote :
Doesn't seem to be stirring up much here ... I guess the topic isn't controversial enough =(
Don't feel bad my HR 1207 and fed posts don't get any love. I guess people don't care enough about their money.

But to keep it on topic come here dear boy have a cigar
 
  Reply With Quote
graceventually is offline graceventually Post #5  June 15,2009, 12:26pm
graceventuall…'s Avatar

was married Nov.28, and is no longer active on this site.

Virtuoso

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 3,056

See profile

I did read the post yesterday, and it inspired me to go read more about the bill; so thanks for that. But I too found it confusing and had the same question you did, TP, about why the labels just don't handle this themselves; so I didn't think I had much to add.
 
  Reply With Quote
ThePriestess is online now ThePriestess Post #6  June 15,2009, 4:57pm
ThePriestess's Avatar

It's a glow-in-the-dark compass ring, so you don't get lost.

Sage

Joined: Apr 2008

Canadian POW held in Florida

Posts: 16,023

See profile

graceventually wrote :
But I too found it confusing and had the same question you did, TP, about why the labels just don't handle this themselves; so I didn't think I had much to add.
I was trying to find information on the subject but I'm not finding a lot of substance ... mostly biased opinion. I had hoped somebody here knew some of the facts surrounding the issue.

Apparently it grants an exemption for "religious" broadcasts ... but if we're talking about compensating artists, shouldn't the artist be the one to determine if someone can use their work at no cost?

And I'm wondering why this is becoming an issue "now" ... I'm sure there's been legal wrangling over the years but radio and labels have coexisted for a long time ... why the push for this type of change so late in the game?
 
  Reply With Quote
dito is offline dito Post #7  June 15,2009, 6:18pm
dito's Avatar

Veteran

Joined: Dec 2008

Colorado

Posts: 1,308

See profile

ThePriestess wrote :
... why the push for this type of change so late in the game?
They have to feel important.
 
  Reply With Quote
graceventually is offline graceventually Post #8  June 15,2009, 7:07pm
graceventuall…'s Avatar

was married Nov.28, and is no longer active on this site.

Virtuoso

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 3,056

See profile

ThePriestess wrote :
I was trying to find information on the subject but I'm not finding a lot of substance ... mostly biased opinion. I had hoped somebody here knew some of the facts surrounding the issue.

Apparently it grants an exemption for "religious" broadcasts ... but if we're talking about compensating artists, shouldn't the artist be the one to determine if someone can use their work at no cost?

And I'm wondering why this is becoming an issue "now" ... I'm sure there's been legal wrangling over the years but radio and labels have coexisted for a long time ... why the push for this type of change so late in the game?
All good questions, and you raise another one: what, under this provision, constitutes a "religious broadcast"? If someone lifts a sermon in its entirety from a preacher heard on the radio, can that be prosecuted? (A seminary professor of mine had that happen to him several years ago). And, would that mean that contemporary Christian recording artists would be subject to a different set of rules? Surely not; it would be hard to see how or why that would be so.
 
  Reply With Quote
tbesq is offline tbesq Post #9  June 16,2009, 4:50am
tbesq's Avatar

Virtuoso

Joined: Jun 2008

Posts: 3,536

See profile

Have no fear, tbesq is here! My postdoc thesis covered this topic, so I'll summarize.

The root of the problem are the royalties radio stations must pay to play sound recordings (whose copyrights are owned by the record labels). These rates are established by the Library of Congress through the Copyright Royalty Board and are negotiated by lobbyists representing the interests of the labels and performing artists. SoundExchange and RIAA are the two biggest lobbyists. The rates determined by the Copyright Royalty Board last year would put many small radio stations (and internet webcasters) out of business; they simply can't afford them. The main radio stations essentially pay no fees -- the labels use these stations as free advertising, and at the same time the stations pocket "pay for play money"; for the stations its a win-win. But many stations are launching digital transmissions through webcasting, and those stations must pay royalties. But there are many webcasters out there who are digitally transmitting music (and gaining advertising revenue) but not paying the required royalties. Some aren't paying them because they can't afford it; others aren't paying because they're just greedy and unethical. Many of the major radio stations also have their own webcasting offshoots, but argue they shouldn't have to pay digital transmission royalties if they're not already paying terrestrial transmission royalties.

What this bill seeks to do is that, rather than require all webcasters great and small to pay the same fees and put many webcasters out of business (which hurts recording artists not represented by major labels), they're making the bigger webcasters pay more than the smaller webcasters, and the non-profit stations would be exempt. The "parity" provision would require terrestrial broadcasters to actually pay royalties like their webcasting colleagues. This worries the labels because (1) they're not going to be able to squeeze as much royalty money from the little guys as they once could; and (2) if the terrestrial stations are now required to pay royalties, they're going to demand more "pay for play" money from the labels.
Last edited by tbesq; June 16,2009 at 5:04am.
 
  Reply With Quote
graceventually is offline graceventually Post #10  June 16,2009, 7:25am
graceventuall…'s Avatar

was married Nov.28, and is no longer active on this site.

Virtuoso

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 3,056

See profile

Thanks, tbesq! That clarifies it a great deal.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply
  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2


« Why is the most liberal candidate becoming the most conservative President? | Politics | Is this board censured per any Homeland Security threads? »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Topics
Topic Topic Starter Board Replies Last Post
Are Humanists Generally More Concerned With Human Rights? rix Atheists, Humorists, and Science 12 May 25,2009 6:41pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“ Excellent, thank you. I think I will leave out the first part, I think it is unnecessary information to give him. I'm not interested in putting myself out there like that and it might be a little ... ” –  generallyyou

Join the “Ending a friendship” discussion

“Alfred Hitchcock - 18 Steven Spielberg - 62 *notice what?” –  dmi

Join the “War of the Directors” discussion

“ I would be "certain people" :P The issue isn't a deal-breaker, but a very strong factor preference-wise, for me.” –  ThePriestess

Join the “How much does race play in your dating someone?” discussion

“Love Texas Hold'em!.. I'm thinking of trying another tournament this summer...not sure yet though.. Never entered a tournament before, outside of online ones. Personally I prefer to play with ... ” –  Freezepop

Join the “Favorite Card Game” discussion

“Make that 3! I also had a crush on Donny Osmond. I think I still have a record or two of his. Suzie ” –  legend29

Join the “Robin Gibbs Dead at 62...How Deep is Your Love?” discussion

“Oh, my revised profile can be seen in the forum in the section where you can ask for a profile review. Suzanne” –  SuzanneScorpio

Join the “Photo Review” discussion

“Just remember, everything that you are feeling and/or are capable of he is as well. If he wanted to reach you, he could. Right now he knows that you are hurting, and that this is not what you ... ” –  lynntlb78

Join the “Can I wait and move on at the same time?” discussion

“ Yohio. And the shortened form (Anya) is nice too.” –  ThePriestess

Join the “Where is Becky?!?” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 9:17am.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0