Disturbing depending on how you look at it.

[REEK BROCK]

Here's an article I read. What's your take on it.



"When the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) isn't busy suing kids for piracy, it's out looking for ways to make up for quarter after quarter of sickly CD sales.

Its new plan is to collect more copyright royalties from radio. Already this year, the RIAA was instrumental in getting dramatically higher royalty rates for Internet radio stations passed by the Copyright Royalty Board. Now it's going after the old-school terrestrial radio stations. The RIAA will try to change the law so that traditional broadcast radio stations pay performance royalties for the songs they play, the LA Times reports.

Broadcast radio stations have long enjoyed a federal exemption from paying the fees, based on the common belief that radio helps sell records. The RIAA is now saying, in effect, that it doesn't believe in the promotional power of radio. It just wants the money.

This move touches directly the struggle of Net radio stations against their new royalty rates increase, which is set to go into effect July 15. One of Net Radio's main arguments in Washington has been that webcasters are forced to pay performance royalties while traditional broadcast stations do not. So much for that.

Who knows if the RIAA will have the lobbying chops to get the terrestrial radio stations' royalties exemption lifted. They'll have to square off against the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), which represents both TV and radio broadcasters, and has an equally strong lobby in the Capital.

Of course the RIAA's mantra remains that it's only acting on behalf of artists. It chooses its public-facing spokespeople accordingly. This time it's even drug out an old Supreme, Mary Wilson, to cry (baby blue make-up running under boom lights) about having to keep on playing Indian bingo palaces at 63 because she never gets a taste of the those sweet radio royalties.

"The creation of music is suffering because of declining sales," moans RIAA Chief Executive Mitch Bainwol in the LA Times piece.

It's true that the RIAA's SoundExchange does collect royalties for artist-copyright owners. But c'mon. If you've had any direct dealings with record labels (as I have), you know that recording contracts are set up so that the artists are usually the last ones to get paid. Sometimes the artist ends up owing money to the label. So give me a break with that "we represent artists" stuff.

The reason the RIAA set up SoundExchange in the first place was to collect revenues for its member labels. And the labels, not the artists, are certainly behind this new (desperate) tactic, too."


What would happen if they charge radio to play songs? hmmm.....

[Mindset]

Well, because I run a record label, and collect royalties from our artists until costs are recouped, the more the better. I mean, if you really look at it, it'll help both artist and label if a nice increase would occur. I get paid back faster, because the cost of a release remains relatively the same, with respect to inflation. The faster costs are recouped, the faster the artist gets money. The more $$ involved in royalties, the more the artists, songwriters, producers will see, while the label's cut remains the same regardless. This could also mean, that off the topic, major artists will start to compete more for "better" music that'll continue to make them money. Maybe we'll see cleaner cut albums, with less fills. On the other hand, maybe we'll see more crap on the radio playing the next fad.

[gullyjewelz]

Maybe I Dont Get It - But It Sounds Like A Good Move - The Artist Needs More Venues To Recieve Money - If A Station (radio, Internet, Tv, Xm , Etc.) Is Pllaying Your Song - Y Shouldnt U Get Something For It?

By The Way - Is Myspace Paying Royalties?

[bknot1]

its good and bad... god for the labels bad for all the closing internet radiao stations that would play anything..cause they have to pay a hight royalty..I remeber readin that awhile back..plus they have to pay some back royalties i think..also really bad for the artist..and it will let back to what label is paying the most for their artist to get plays (yes payola still exist..just in a different form and legal terms)

artist with need to get alot of play to really see royalties from plays..at least 500 stations or more...cause you know they play the songs every hour..daily..

i don't know..its sounds like to me they still tryin to lookout for the labels...

as for declining sells..well thay are making alot of big money on these digital downloads.. the new singles of the future...just look how much income it has broght Apple..

time will tell

[bknot1]

Originally Posted by gullyjewelz

By The Way - Is Myspace Paying Royalties?

no , no music hosting site is paying royalties that i know of..

if they do that the proably won't be free to join..

[gullyjewelz]

Ok - Cool - Im Just Tryin To "research" That Tish - Antoher Dude I Know Was Like They Payin - They Keepin It On The Low -cuz If Dudez Aitn Puttin Their Paperwork In To Bmi, Etc. Then They Dont Git Paid . ..

[greenmilitia]

I don't know, I've never had any dealings with a record company or anything, but it seems like unless your running your own label, your probably getting screwed outta money a lot of the time.

[Mindset]

Originally Posted by greenmilitia

I don't know, I've never had any dealings with a record company or anything, but it seems like unless your running your own label, your probably getting screwed outta money a lot of the time.

I don't know if you know this, but labels have to pay a lot of people already. Who else, is going to drop $100K on studio time? Or pay a million for a spot in the super bowl commercials? or drop another million for a music video. Not that all labels are capable of that type of budget, but in reality, there's a lot of costs that come out the label's pockets for the artist and his/her spotlight. No artist is going to come out of a deal with $50 million in an instant. For a successful regional release, it costs around $500,000-750,000+ easily.

[Fieva]

I think that makes underground artists have to step their game up. You don't work, you don't eat. If your product is bullshit, expect the same.

[greenmilitia]

nah, I know there is a lot of costs that labels have to cover, I guess I didn't really mean you get screwed out of money, as an artist. But if your only getting like 17 cents off an album that retails for 12.99-15.99, ya know, that kinda sucks. But like I said I ain't ever dealt with a label, so if that time ever comes it will be interesting to see what happens

[breeeeza]

The creation of music is suffering because of declining sales," moans RIAA Chief Executive Mitch Bainwol in the LA Times piece.


Biggest load of shit, the best music is written because the artist is intrinsicly motivated and WANTS to write a music and not because they HAVE to for the lable to get another album out.Also too many bands are doing it just for the money shitty bands you here on the radio that make awful music but get payed alot.