Anxiety said:

But it doesn't matter IF they shoot themselves in their own feet. They should at least have the OPTION to shoot themselves in their own feet.

The problem here, from what I understand, is that artists are NOT being compensated correctly for their work being aired on radio.

Take it to another medium. Let's say I am a MMA Fighter and I have a contract with UFC to fight on television, and I get a cut from the proceeds of attendance and PPV sales. Agreements are made with Charter, Cox, and Time Warner Cable to report and reimburse PPV sales. I get a check later based on this.

2 weeks later, UFC makes a side deal with Charter Cable so that Charter can license the fight as part of a "Greatest Hits" PPV package. UFC gets paid from Charter per PPV subscription, but argues that I should not get compensated as this is a separate deal. Also, they say they should be glad that I am getting that publicity as being acknowledged as a "Greatest Hits" quality fighter. They argue that because I am being endorsed for free by UFC, my own value will rise, and I will make my money in the future.

These artists are saying "Fuck the future, I want my money now." Somebody is taking your musical ability and making money off of it, and you never signed a contract to allow this to happen. Now you're being told you have no legal leverage to request compensation. It's bull.
[Edited 8/5/09 8:08am]

Wrong. This will NOT kill Radio.

Radio is still a VERY popular media. Is revenue down? Of course it is. Everything is down in this economy.

nod I agree with VainAndy.

As I've said before in previous postings, I didn't walk away from music radio, radio walked away from me. How I listen, purchase, or discover new artist/musicians in most instances has been reactionary rather personal seeking out other alternatives. Haven said that.....

When is the last time I've heard a Sheila E song on the radio in Chicago? I can't remember and supposedly Chicago has 2 radio stations who claim to play classic old school R&B/Soul/Funk music. Hell, they had all but stopped playing Michael Jackson/Jackson 5/ The Jacksons music all together, untill the man died.

I honeslty think Shelia E, Dionne Warwick, and others are fighting the wrong battle; artist/musicians need to start thinking out of the box . Established, current, independent musicians, music producers and/or songwriters should organize and fight the mononolpy record companies have over public music radio. They need to fight how music sales are gathered and counted... this is were they're being ripped off Big time. Artist/ musicians also need to be about the business of gaining control/ownership of their master copies from jump. Prince spoke to this very subject on the Tavis Smiley Show a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/t...rince.html

What's killed radio? The choices made 30 plus years ago, deregulation of TV & radio.. that's really an oxymoron. Broadcasting was never deregulated. If you have any doubt of this, write to the FCC and tell them you want to start a radio or television station Chicago, Los Angeles, New York or in any major/mid-size metropolitan city. They'll write you back and tell you that there are no frequencies available. They will tell you can always buy an existing license. For $20,000,000 - $100,000,000 that makes it, at least for most of us, a non-option.

In other words, under the rubric of "deregulation," existing broadcasters --- unlike truckers and airlines --- have been given eternal squatting rights on their frequencies. A couple of years ago, when the FCC tried to open up FM frequencies for non-corporate low-power operations --- commercial and public broadcasters alike demanded that congress "protect" their frequencies. Legislation to this effect was immediately passed which restricted new FM stations to the backwoods of Montana and South Dakota and Minnesota and Alabama.

The reality is that deregulation has effected a consolidation of broadcast licensees into the hands of a few huge corporations. Twenty years ago, no one entity could have more than 5 TV, 7 AM, or 7 FM stations. There are now operators, such as Clear Channel and Infinity Broadcasting (Viacom), who own more than 1,000 radio stations. We thus have a bitterly restrictive federal broadcast policy that encourages oligopolies, which is anathema to the free marketplace of ideas.

I agree with VainAndy.

As I've said before in previous postings, I didn't walk away from music radio, radio walked away from me. How I listen, purchase, or discover new artist/musicians in most instances has been reactionary rather personal seeking out other alternatives. Haven said that.....

When is the last time I've heard a Sheila E song on the radio in Chicago? I can't remember and supposedly Chicago has 2 radio stations who claim to play classic old school R&B/Soul/Funk music. Hell, they had all but stopped playing Michael Jackson/Jackson 5/ The Jacksons music all together, untill the man died.

I honeslty think Shelia E, Dionne Warwick, and others are fighting the wrong battle; artist/musicians need to start thinking out of the box . Established, current, independent musicians, music producers and/or songwriters should organize and fight the mononolpy record companies have over public music radio. They need to fight how music sales are gathered and counted... this is were they're being ripped off Big time. Artist/ musicians also need to be about the business of gaining control/ownership of their master copies from jump. Prince spoke to this very subject on the Tavis Smiley Show a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/t...rince.html

What's killed radio? The choices made 30 plus years ago, deregulation of TV & radio.. that's really an oxymoron. Broadcasting was never deregulated. If you have any doubt of this, write to the FCC and tell them you want to start a radio or television station Chicago, Los Angeles, New York or in any major/mid-size metropolitan city. They'll write you back and tell you that there are no frequencies available. They will tell you can always buy an existing license. For $20,000,000 - $100,000,000 that makes it, at least for most of us, a non-option.

In other words, under the rubric of "deregulation," existing broadcasters --- unlike truckers and airlines --- have been given eternal squatting rights on their frequencies. A couple of years ago, when the FCC tried to open up FM frequencies for non-corporate low-power operations --- commercial and public broadcasters alike demanded that congress "protect" their frequencies. Legislation to this effect was immediately passed which restricted new FM stations to the backwoods of Montana and South Dakota and Minnesota and Alabama.

The reality is that deregulation has effected a consolidation of broadcast licensees into the hands of a few huge corporations. Twenty years ago, no one entity could have more than 5 TV, 7 AM, or 7 FM stations. There are now operators, such as Clear Channel and Infinity Broadcasting (Viacom), who own more than 1,000 radio stations. We thus have a bitterly restrictive federal broadcast policy that encourages oligopolies, which is anathema to the free marketplace of ideas.

Should teachers be paid every time a former student uses some of the knowledge learnt?

Should midwives be paid for every day a child they helped delivering lives?

Payment should be for work, not for the results of work!!!

Ymaginatif said:

QFT

if i buy a cd should i have to pay for it AGAIN every time i listen to it?

i just bought a new Acer computer. should i send a check to Acer every time i turn the computer on?

this whole thing is just GREED at it's worst. sorry, but that is my opinion.

Dauphin said:

so it's a matter of bull vs. shooting oneself in the foot?

there has to be a better dialog than that, no?

Like song writers, performers and record companies have a renumeration right for radio airplay of their recordings all over the world.

Except in the US.

Performers should have that right too.

The problem tho' is that, even if they also get that right, 99% would sign it away in a heartbeat to the record company. They would only let the company profit even more off their work.

Tremolina said:

So true. Some of them would get offers from record companies and lose their future profits.

"But beyond radio's economic landscape, we strongly believe that local radio stations provide compensation to record labels and artists today," stated NEWBERRY. "The artist is 'paid' with free advertising and free exposure every time a radio station plays their music. Local free radio is the unique developer, exposer, promoter, and great populizer of new and old music, to multiple new and old generations of listeners."

i don't understand it all but if anyone thinks I'm paying for radio, they are bat shit crazy.

i don't understand it all but if anyone thinks I'm paying for radio, they are bat shit crazy.

Vendetta1 said:

You won't pay. The radio station broadcasting the songs would.

Tremolina said:

Yes, I know but the cost would get passed on to us somehow, right?

From AllAccess.com



Testifying on behalf of THE MUSICFIRST COALITION TODAY (8/4), GRAMMY-nominated artist SHEILA E. and ROUNDER RECORDS Co-founder MARIAN LEIGHTON LEVY will tell members of the Senate Judiciary committee that it's past time to enact a fair performance right on radio.

"For all of the complex legal and legislative discussions that have taken place around this topic over the decades, the issue for musicians is really quite simple," said SHEILA E. "We believe that being paid for one's work is a basic American right. Whether your workplace is an office, a classroom, a factory or a recording studio, every American worker deserves to be compensated for his or her labor. And any business that profits from another's work should share some of that profit."

MARIAN LEIGHTON LEVY will describe to Senators the amount of money being lost overseas to the artists who sign on the Rounder label alone. "A striking example of this inequity can be found in the case of the recent ROBERT PLANT/ALISON KRAUSS record we released here in the U.S.," LEIGHTON LEVY said. "Just last year 'Please Read The Letter' won a GRAMMY for Album of the Year while receiving almost no commercial radio play. Since ROBERT PLANT is a U.K. native, he will be eligible to receive payment for his work on the recording when it is played around the world, but ALISON will not be paid because she is a U.S. native."

NAB Runs Ads In D.C. Trades

The NAB kept their position before lawmakers by placing an ad in CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY and NATIONAL JOURNAL's CONGRESS DAILY highlighting the relationship between free radio airplay and record sales.

"Radio is the #1 way listeners discover new music and new artists. This free promotion translates to billions of dollars each year in music, concert ticket and merchandise sales for labels and their performers," reads the advertisement.

The advertisement features a mosaic comprised of gold and platinum albums given to radio stations by record labels in appreciation for promoting music through free radio airplay.

NAB Gets It's Turn Before The Committee

NAB Joint Board Chair STEVE NEWBERRY, Pres./CEO of KENTUCKY-based COMMONWEALTH BROADCASTING CORPORATION testified before the U.S. Senate Committee On The Judiciary TODAY (8/4) regarding the impact of a Performance Fee on rasio.

Said NEWBERRY, "It will be no surprise to anyone in this room when I say that radio stations across the country oppose the performance fee legislation we are considering here today. I believe this legislation will upend local radio broadcasting as you have always known it." He continued, "I have been a part of the radio industry for over 30 years and I can honestly tell you that I have never seen the economic pain the radio industry is currently experiencing. And as challenging as radio's current economic landscape is, it will deteriorate even further if a performance fee were to be enacted. Already this year, publicly traded companies are reporting revenues down 24 percent, 20 percent, 24 percent and 25 percent."

"But beyond radio's economic landscape, we strongly believe that local radio stations provide compensation to record labels and artists today," stated NEWBERRY. "The artist is 'paid' with free advertising and free exposure every time a radio station plays their music. Local free radio is the unique developer, exposer, promoter, and great populizer of new and old music, to multiple new and old generations of listeners."

So, if this does pass, how long till we have to pay to use libraries? Ya never know, the authors might decide they deserve to be paid whenever a book is read.

Here's a better analogy:

I fuck my girl on camera. I agree it should be shared with a group of people who paid to see the clip. We split the money.

Later I find out the girl is selling the vid everywhere and to anybody who will pay her, but I don't get to see any money from it. I demand to be paid for each sale and she tells me I should be happy for the publicity I get, that if she didn't show my video, I'd never get laid again.

Rightnow in the US, the SONGWRITER does get paid for airplay.

The "performer" or singer does not. I don't know why that is but that is how it is.

Sheila probably does get $ from Glam Life and Love Bizarre Radio plays because Prince gave her songwriting credit at ASCAP.

It's also why Mariah is super rich (she gets $ from airpay as writer and as both wrier and perofrmer from sales) while Whitney is probably broke (she never wrote anything).

GaryMF said:

Now that you say this, I am starting to rethink my position on the matter. I was going under the impression that they were targeting the ARTIST in this. They are just targeting the performer. While there are many performers that do deserve royalties, they should do like Mariah and put it in their contract to give them more rights. Many performers are just hired for their role just like a guitarist or engineer.