Houston We have a problem!

[Diofan]

I checked into this, it is NOT a fraud!

Well kids,

Speaking as an internet broadcaster as well as a musician, I need to raise awareness about an issue that is very close to my heart.

Thanks to a new Bill passed in the United States, due to pressure from the Recording Industry Association of America (which has far too much power already) the future of internet radio is seriously threatened. Internet radio stations will be subject to much higher licensing fees, and these fees are proportional to the amount of listeners. One average, every station will have to pay 1.75 cents per listener per hour. In other words, a station that has an audience of 500 listeners will pay roughly $210 per day, or $76,000 per year, which is about 10 times more than what stations are paying now. This will force most internet stations off the air. This of course, raises may questions.

First off, why is it that in the U.S. the body that governs the recording industry is allowed to govern or at least influence the rules of internet broadcasting. This is direct conflict of interest since in most countries, the task of governing broadcasting lies with one organization, while the process of collecting royalties on behalf of the artists fall to another. (In Canada’s case, the CRTC governs broadcasting while Socan represents publishers and artists). One has to ask why the RIAA is allowed to have so much power over the legislation of the broadcast medium, while at the same time protecting their own interests. The argument most often given is that with declining CD sales and illegal downloading, other means of collecting revenues must be explored. This sort of action however, punishes those who are widening the exposure of new artists to potentially new fans and prevents it artists from promoting themselves through Internet Radio.

Many Internet radio stations have become instrumental in promoting new artists and independent record labels by helping them establish a fan base. Artists and labels need to be aware that this avenue of exposure is about to become a thing of the past. By imposing these high fees, only the high profile broadcasters such as AOL will prevail, and only the most mainstream programming will remain available. By making these fees retroactive to January 1st of 2006 every broadcaster will be left owing an unreasonable and unforeseen about of money to the RIAA, which will force most broadcasters into bankruptcy. To put things into perspective, popular stations with an average of 1,000 listeners currently pay about $1,500 to $2,500 per month to stay on the air. Now they will owe an additional $12,000 for each for each month they were on the air from January 1st of 2006, which is an amount that not even the best business plan in world could cover, and as a result, most will simply close down. And of course, Podcasting would have to be affected as well. Anyone who has a Podcast would have to pay the same price per listener.

This whole scheme does raise some questions. Why is the RIAA so motivated to shut down Internet broadcasting? From a personal point of view I can only draw the conclusion that the RIAA is trying to downsize the industry as a whole. Since the Alternative Revolution in the early 90’s the independent record labels have been able to do fairly well. The inception of myspace.com has enabled artists to promote themselves with ease. All they have to do is make a few tracks available for download, and if a music director likes what they hear, they can simply include it into their stations programming. Where does that leave the RIAA under the old rules? They don’t get a cent because they didn’t do any work for it. And that is what the RIAA hope to change in my opinion. They want to change the rules by taking away any avenue of promotion that does not include the major labels, and once again keep the entire industry to themselves.

One of my biggest questions regarding this issue is: What will happen to terrestrial radio broadcasters who also stream their normal broadcasts on the internet? At the moment the amount of money a terrestrial broadcaster pays does not depend on the amount of listeners they have. They pay a monthly fee, and that is that. They are not being punished for being successful. So why should the rules be different for Internet Broadcasters? At the very least, to make things fair, commercial broadcasters should be required to be paying the same rate as Internet broadcasters are, if they are streaming their programming on the Internet as well. But if that becomes the law, then that would put may campus radio stations in jeopardy as well. Their transmitters tend to be of low power and they especially benefit from using the Internet to reach more listeners. By being forced to pay for streaming Internet broadcasts on a “per listener” basis, most campus radio stations will have to give up that practice as well.

So who knows why the RIAA is going after the very institutions that are giving artists a wider audience. Why not go after big businesses that are not paying royalties the music that their customers are listening to while they are “On Hold”? Why not go after illegal Russian download sites that pose as legitimate? Why not go after night clubs that aren’t paying they play or don’t bother submitting playlists?

The argument of providing a fairer way of sharing royalties for artists is a completely invalid one. Artists are not getting their fare share of royalties anyway. Random samples of major radio station playlists are taken, and payments are calculated on that basis. Club playlists are rarely requested and campus radio playlists don’t seem to account for much of a difference. Internet broadcasters do submit their playlists like terrestial broadcasters, but the how they affect the way that royalties are paid out is minimal, due to their “insignificant market share”. While Internet broadcasters tend to exist by filling a void that regular broadcasters aren’t filling, the revenue they create for the RIAA is being primarily given to those who haven’t earned it in the first place.

Given these facts the days on Internet Radio seem numbered. There are of course things that can be done to attempt to revoke these new regulations. Regardless of whether you live in the U.S. or not, these rulings do affect you. So write as many letters to congress as you can. Congress:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

It may be time to spend a few dollars to buy an FM transmitter. There are many good kits out there for the novice and some nice antennas are available as well. People have to face the fact that the RIAA has made it easier to broadcast on FM without a license and without getting caught than it is to broadcast over the internet without getting caught. I think the fines are lower too.

Anyhow, my plea goes out to you all, not only as an internet DJ, but also as an artist, to do what you can to keep internet radio on the air in the future. It is after all the true Spirit of Radio.

In response to this, a group of internet Broadcasters have formed a website at http://www.savenetradio.org/. I urge listeners as well as my fellow DJ's to visit this site and do what you can to keep stations like Renegade Retro on the air!

(Thundervamp, I have a PSA from them if you want me to upload it)

[Rice_Cube]

WTF! I didn't know they could do that...is this like a lobby for big time net radio stations to eliminate small time competition?

[TheDamnedOne]

I'm very worried about this, because I have several friends (besides the ones here) who are internet DJs and if this happens I will lose contact with a lot of them.

[Diofan]

That and yet another way for the RIAA to (Supposedly) make more $$$. Which if you think about it is pretty stupid! Most Online stations PROMOTE music which in turn could BENEFIT the RIAA. but these greedy asshats only care about one thing...MONEY...Not the Stations or the artists!

[TheDamnedOne]

Oh btw, that letter was originall posted by a friend of mine at Myspace, who works for another online radio station I'm not sure I should mention here.

[Diofan]

I saw your initial post on another forum and didn't beleive it at first, went to snopes, didn't find anything there! So did a search on google and found the "savenetradio.org" site, it confirmed the story. the bill passed on March
2nd and is retroactive to 2006. What this means is if the RIAA has their way, and this bill is not repealed, Broadcasters such as Renegade Retro could be in the hole by as much as 1.3 MILLION Dollars! I don't know about you all, But I don't think we three DJs alone have that kind of spare cash floating around collectively, let alone the general Membership of the forum!

[ThunderVamp9]

Yep, here we go again, same thing we went through about 2 or so years ago. We'll fight it, of course. I'll write my letters, but it's going to come to this:

We can't pay our representatives as much as the RIAA can.

THe same thing is going to happen as happened last time. We're going to fight it, and it will have no effect. But we'll fight it anyway. The RIAA does not want independent broadcasters like us out there. For one thing, we ARE a thorn in Corporate radio's side. We don't give the masses what they WANT us to give them, which is the flavor-of-the-month pop act that everyone will have forgotten 3 months from now. Look at RR, how hard is it to hear this music these days? I'll tell you, here in Maine it's damn near impossible. There are no terrestrial 80's stations here. Ther RIAA wants it that way. They want us to hear what THEY choose. Or to have to PAY to hear what WE want. As well as for the broadcasters to pay.

That's how they want it and without MASSIVE support and threats to have our reps terms in office be their last terms if they approve it, which simply won't happen because there's not enough interest in internet radio overall to make a threat like that stick, then that's how they're going to get it. Because they have deeper pockets than us internet broadcasters.

RR averages 4 listeners at any given time. This new rate structure means that it will cost me approximately $1.69 per day to continue to run this station, or approximately $51 a month just to broadcast to 4 listeners per song, per day. Plus hosting costs, music costs, and other fees. If more people tune in - I pay more. Where's the incentive to grow the station? Who cares that we offer links for people to BUY the music, right?

[ThunderVamp9]

In addition, as it's retroactive to Jan 2006, I'll also have to pay an additional $350 just to get caught up. Minimum.

[Diofan]

It's all Bullshit! The only way to circumvent this while leaving the law lie is to simply not play any RIAA represented music. That wipes out damn near every song on metal shop, Probably a large percentage of Fusion, and ALL 80s request show....That's not counting the songs in regular rotation. Many stations will continue to broadcast in the form of Pirate stations going underground.

Vamp has a very good point. There are Links to BUY the music in the playlist...it's not like RR is ripping off RIAA...if anything, we promote them (indirectly). The asshats should at least take that into account, but they won't!

[ThunderVamp9]

BTW, the .0011 per listener/per performance things is just for 2007. The rates are as follows:

RAIN has learned the rates that the Board has decided on, effective
retroactively through the beginning of 2006. They are as follows:

2006 - $.0008 per play
2007 - $.0011 per play
2008 - $.0014 per play
2009 - $.0018 per play
2010 - $.0019 per play

[ThunderVamp9]

Originally Posted by Diofan

The only way to circumvent this while leaving the law lie is to simply not play any RIAA represented music. That wipes out damn near every song on metal shop, Probably a large percentage of Fusion, and ALL 80s request show....That's not counting the songs in regular rotation.

It doesn't just wipe out the live shows. It wipes out RR. There is almost NOTHING in the playlist that is not RIAA represented. Plain and simple, RR as a concept could not exist with what I have for music. To take out that music is to take out 10,800+ tracks out of 10,900.


Not an option.

[Diofan]

There is no doubt that this will inevitably shutter most if not all webcasting operations in their jurisdiction and the problem is SoundExchange who's members only include record labels.

The public has been misinformed for years that the RIAA represents the music and those who create it. If you look at the RIAA membership it does not include one single musician, artist or composer and never has. Therefore the RIAA has no business in collecting massive royalties that only go to the record labels while the artists and creators of the actual music never see a dime of it. The Copyright Royalty Board needs to elimiate SoundExchange and elect a new royalty collection organization that has no ties to the RIAA.

This is a sham and I think the more the public knows about it the more they'll agree. Something's wrong when the people who create the music get little to nothing and those who profit in the billions of dollars off the music already profit even more.

It needs to stop.


Vamp I have a PSA from savenetradio if you want me to upload it to FTP, if anything it could get the word out some. I can also see to it that Midas gets it for use on RR's Myspace.

[Rice_Cube]

For music's sake and for your sake, I hope the little guy wins.

[ThunderVamp9]

Here's another problem for you to consider -

As stations shut down, their listeners will go to other stations. That is going to increase their per listener fees, which will cost them more money, causing them to shut down as fees get too high.

Picture this. RR gets 4 listeners at a time on average. We have capacity for 30 listeners at any given time. As big stations shut down, their listeners come to RR. Now, instead of 4 listeners at a time costing me an average of $51 a month, I am suddenly being faced with charges of $380 a month. What's going to happen then? RR shuts down because I can't afford to keep it running any more.

That is the effect we can expect to see.

[ThunderVamp9]

Originally Posted by Rice_Cube

For music's sake and for your sake, I hope the little guy wins.

The little guy is not likely to win. We don't have the financial backing to beat the RIAA in Washington. Sad, but true.