Quote :

"With the furor over the impending rate hike for Internet radio stations, wouldn't a good solution be for streaming internet stations to simply not play RIAA-affiliated labels' music and focus on independent artists? Sounds good, except that the RIAA's affiliate organization SoundExchange claims it has the right to collect royalties for any artist, no matter if they have signed with an RIAA label or not. 'SoundExchange (the RIAA) considers any digital performance of a song as falling under their compulsory license. If any artist records a song, SoundExchange has the right to collect royalties for its performance on Internet radio. Artists can offer to download their music for free, but they cannot offer their songs to Internet radio for free ... So how it works is that SoundExchange collects money through compulsory royalties from Webcasters and holds onto the money. If a label or artist wants their share of the money, they must become a member of SoundExchange and pay a fee to collect their royalties."

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/04/29/0335224.shtml


So, basically, the short version of this is that if you are not associated with the RIAA and have songs of yours on internet radio stations, they will collect royalties on these songs, which they have no rights to, and only pay you if you join their organization.

This is insanity.

4/29/2007 11:19:47 PM

THIS IS SPARTA

4/29/2007 11:20:34 PM

This pisses me off, and I don't even collect music/songs.

RIAA is basically a giant monopoly, right? I could have sworn those were illegal in this country. Why haven't they been split up or disbanded? Especially in light of really dishonest shit like this.

4/29/2007 11:25:01 PM

They're more like the mafia than a monopoly.

4/29/2007 11:26:04 PM

This pisses me off, and I don't even collect music/songs.

RIAA is basically a giant monopoly mafia, right? I could have sworn those were illegal in this country. Why haven't they been split up or disbanded arrested? Especially in light of really dishonest shit like this.

4/29/2007 11:27:34 PM

the RIAA is a "trade group", not a company. By definition, a trade group is made up of multiple companies, who's total summed market share is often a huge majority of the total market. The RIAA doesn't produce or sell anything, per se. The record labels that are a part of the Association sell things, so you can't really go after the RIAA as a monopoly

4/29/2007 11:49:10 PM

that is insane

4/30/2007 12:02:10 AM

i'm really failing to see how in the world this even approaches being Constitutional in any way, shape, or form...

4/30/2007 12:05:11 AM

Again as in most disruptions of commerce, it appears that gov't is to blame....

Quote :

""The recent U.S. Copyright Office ruling regarding webcasting designated SoundExchange to collect and distribute to all nonmembers as well as its members. The Librarian of Congress issued his decision with rates and terms to govern the compulsory license for webcasters (Internet-only radio) and simulcastors (retransmissions)." (http://soundexchange.com/faq.html#b4) "

RIAA can do this only because of special treatment from the gov't.

[Edited on April 30, 2007 at 12:58 AM. Reason : .]

4/30/2007 12:57:32 AM

Quote :

"Again as in most disruptions of commerce, it appears that gov't is to blame...."

Why is it the government that corrupts the market and not the market that corrupts the government? You've got a chicken and the egg situation here, the market corrupts the government, the government corrupts the market, etc.

[Edited on April 30, 2007 at 1:58 AM. Reason : ]

4/30/2007 1:58:06 AM

riiiight

4/30/2007 4:14:07 AM

somebody high up in the gov. must be getting some phat checks from the RIAA. Corruption FTW!

^^it usually is in most cases the market that corrupts the gov. He with the deepest pockets makes the rules.

[Edited on April 30, 2007 at 5:18 AM. Reason : fda]

4/30/2007 5:17:32 AM

So it could be said that BOTH parties corrupt one another. A corrupt government official allows himself to be bribed by anyone who is corrupt enough (and obviously rich enough) to want to bribe him. It may not necessarily be a "the chicken and the egg" problem, simply that two initial conditions have to be met before the cycle can begin.

4/30/2007 7:03:15 AM

The gov't is forcing a contract to exist between webcasters and the RIAA. It is also forcing a contract between the artist and the RIAA. The whole idea of voluntary contract has been eliminated. This is a big no-no in the libertarian world.

4/30/2007 11:13:21 AM

This doesn't make any sense. But let me try to get it straight.

If you do an online radio, you'll have to pay directly to one and only one organization, the RIAA. Then the artist can sue the RIAA and get their 5% royalty of what was paid to the RIAA if they so wish. Then the service that the RIAA offers is...

bribing the government?

4/30/2007 3:24:04 PM

i think all of you are complete and utter cunts and wish you all a horrible horrible death

4/30/2007 3:28:56 PM

Quote :

"The gov't is forcing a contract to exist between webcasters and the RIAA. It is also forcing a contract between the artist and the RIAA. The whole idea of voluntary contract has been eliminated. This is a big no-no in the libertarian world."

What if an artist is not American and living in say Canada or Britain or the Central African Republic or whatever? How could the RIAA force non-American musicians to accept a deal based on an agreement they have with the American government, let alone the RIAA owning their music (since we're all on the same internet)? This is unenforceable. How can one government's decision with a trade group give said trade group complete ownership across an entire medium as diverse as the internet?

[Edited on April 30, 2007 at 4:15 PM. Reason : .]

4/30/2007 4:10:26 PM

this will never pass judicial review, so I wouldn't worry about it

4/30/2007 4:18:04 PM

Quote :

"The gov't is forcing a contract to exist between webcasters and the RIAA. It is also forcing a contract between the artist and the RIAA. The whole idea of voluntary contract has been eliminated."

A private company in response to market forces is forcing the government to force these contracts.

You've got a mutually recursive scenario that could be traced back forever.

Quote :

"This is a big no-no in the libertarian world."

So is peeing on the candy cane trees in the gumdrop forest or kicking the unicorn or all the other things in make-believe-land, opps, I mean "libertarian world"

4/30/2007 5:39:04 PM

Quote :

"A private company in response to market forces is forcing the government to force these contracts. You've got a mutually recursive scenario that could be traced back forever. "

If the government wasn't given the power to magically create mandatory contracts, it would be a moot point what the private company's response to market forces are as they wouldn't be able to force mandatory contracts on uninvolved parties.

4/30/2007 7:58:27 PM

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0407/3765.html

5/1/2007 1:10:09 PM

Quote :

"If the government wasn't given the power to magically create mandatory contracts"

Market forces would just corrupt it untill it did. It's just too profitable for companies to stay out of the government.

5/1/2007 3:12:09 PM

SAVE INTERNET RADIO!

http://www.savenetradio.org/index.html

The CRB has handed down increasing royalty rates to net-radio that will essentially put most out of business. There is a bill in congress that could save the music we all love. Use the link to contact your representative and get them to co-sponser the bill. I found that David Price is already. I just checked on Brad Miller and it doesn't look like he has yet, so I would higly advise everyone to check and see if their rep is on board and if not to make the call.

5/3/2007 3:29:40 AM

Quote :

"What if an artist is not American and living in say Canada or Britain or the Central African Republic or whatever? How could the RIAA force non-American musicians to accept a deal based on an agreement they have with the American government, let alone the RIAA owning their music (since we're all on the same internet)?"

This would be for American online radio stations.

5/3/2007 8:48:54 AM