Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Can I Paypal some of my AM donation to instead see that? :winkies: :yougo

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I just Paypal(ed) $100 for my Patron status plus......let's make the plus a video of Julie's dance. :) :rofl:

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

These SoundExchange guys are a real piece of work:

The disputed status of the deal had some Internet radio operators claiming that negotiations were tantamount to a reprieve on the deadline.

SoundExchange denied that assertion and said nonpaying webcasters would be charged retroactively with interest, said Richard Ades, a spokesman for the group.

With interest! Their shamelessness knows no bounds.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071601484.html

I hope Congress passes the IREA soon, it appears that is the only way to settle this once and for all.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Yeah, and now now they're insisting on DRM on streams:

http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/07/...xchange-d.html

They probably were headed there all along, and the 1200% raise was only a 'negotiating' point. Bastards!

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Help me out here.......

"I just want to get back to helping webcasters get business and figuring out how get more ad revenue," said Johnie Floater, general manager of media at Live365. "We've been spending all of our time playing lawyers and lobbyists."

I read this quote and it sounds to me that Live365 is fighting to use music for free to enable internet radio to make profits.

You see the inconsistency? This is not the same fight we have. Not only are we non-profit (which doesn't mean non-exempt from this) but we do this for no reason but to have fun. We do not sell ad space! We play music.

While I think that Sound Exchange is reprehensible in their tactics, they do have a valid point. And in the end, I cannot see how Live 365 can say this and expect not to get whacked.

So by association, we will eventually be swept into whatever happens with the "big boys". And that's a shame - we're HELPING artists and that's it!

So watch a good thing be forever dissolved, while your kids steal music and hurt artists.

Lovely!

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I'm not going to read into what their statement meant. I will say though that this whole internet radio thing is new and many have yet to figure out how to make money from it. Do you remember the .BOMB era of the late '90s. Sights were running in the red but stocks for them soaring. This was all on a lot of speculative gambles that the web would win them fortunes -- it did not. There are sites from that era that did survive and make it, but there are many more that failed. Unless you are actually "selling" something, making money on the internet is dicey at best. Many of the sites we all visit are littered with ads sold to pay for the space. For example, my favorite, mywaste.com ;) People go there and setup pages for free. GREAT, I suppose, and companies pay for ad space to make this possible. However, is there really any gain from these ads? In many cases, it's difficult to prove.

The RIAA and SoundExchange have been buffaloing the public that streaming radio is making big money. I don't believe it and even if it did, why should streaming radio pay humongous amounts to do what the traditional air-waves broadcasters do for free?

WHich is why the artists are following the links on sites like savenetradio.org to voice their opinions. The non-big-label artists will never see a single iota of the money SE collects. For that matter, I wonder how much money the big-label artists will see.


I do not think it is right to download music unless it is explicitly sanctioned by the artist(s) as a free download. I personally enjoy the tangible media.

While most of what is downloaded I could care less about, I do have to look at it as if it is music and artists that I do. Unless the music creation model changes, free music is not free. Steve Hogarth has spoken at length about his/Marillion's ideas for changing the model when they did their album pre-orders. It sounded like a really great idea but I doubt it could ever truly work.

I still think that the "traditional" model of exposing a listener to the music and then, if they like what they hear, they purchase is a model that will be with us for a long time. If the RIAA/SE/LoC CRB have their way, this model will be corrupted. Strange is that this is how they've been making money for as long as music radio has been popular... at least the past 50 years... maybe more.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

To my knowledge nobody is arguing that they should be able to stream music without paying the publishers/artists for using their content, but rather that there is a large disparity between terrestrial radio which only pays publisher fees (paid to songwriters & publishers of the original tune), satellite radio which pays publisher fees as well as 7.5% of profits as artist fees (which pays the performer of the tune regardless of whether they wrote it) and internet broadcasters which have been hit by the vastly more onerous fees that have caused the current furor. The point is that there should be a level playing field regardless of broadcast medium. Your point regarding whether the station profits being a deciding factor in usage fees may have some validity and we can hope some provisions are made to help out non-profit broadcasters like AM, but the larger issue is the difference in fee structure based on the transmission medium IMHO.

It seems to me that SoundExchange (and therefore the RIAA and therefore the large media companies) are just trying to shut internet radio down because they can't control it. Pretty much anybody can be an internet radio broadcaster, it has a much lower barrier to entry as the business folks say, due to much simpler transmission equipment and no need to license frequency spectrum. So the current entrenched regime is fearful because they see their oligopoly slipping away. At least that's what it looks like to my eyes.

It seems to me like a basic charge of $500/year + 7.5% of profits might be a reasonable across the board fee rate, that way artists get paid by everybody, non-profits just pay a flat $500/year and the for-profit big stations share their profits and the artists get exposure as well. If this were used for all broadcast media it seems it would be a fair system IMHO. I guess stations would need to keep some kind of track play count as well so SoundExchange would know how to divvy up the fees from each station.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Very salient points, vax, but my entire rant has to do with the fact that we seem to be wanting to protect a medium that wants to operate like regular radio. Live 365, etc. they're companies. They want to make money.

That's not what we're doing here. This is a community. Regardless of whether the existing model is right (and we all know it's f'd up) if someone wants to operate an internet station for profit, expect the fees to be levied. I know it's obscene....

As for the above, the artists use myspace exactly to promote the traditional model. They give out samples of their work and then the opportunity to buy it. I couldn't care less about the ads. Annoying, you bet. But let them fight and make money. I operate an account because I was suggested that it was a great way to promote the show. It's been great.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Jt, I like your ideas. One thing though....

To charge based on profit would reduce the incentive. There are only two types here.....accepting advertising revenue or accepting only donations.

To my knowledge we only accept donations. There's no money for those a'holes to grab....so we'd be left alone I'd hope.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I seem to remember after having read the complete diatribe regarding rates, in the beginning, that there was a fee model based on the small non profits, in addition to the large for profit stations. According to the fee structure for the small non profit, it wasn't a completely obliterating amount. I need to find that document and read it again...it was legaleeze and very long. Unless they've changed the content, iirc there was a clear difference in definition and treatment between the two types of station - profit and non.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Yes Mossy. It may be semantics, but it's what type of revenue that is accepted to me should be the determination. Donation supported stations should get a break.

There's really no such distinction between profit and nonprofit. It's just that's all these people understand, I guess.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Here's what goo posted in a previous thread:

The problem with the "non-commercial" definition in the above fee structure is that it's based on some arbitrary number of listeners (namely 218 24/7/365 listeners). It shouldn't be user count based IMHO, that could mean one starts the year at a low rate and then sometime during the year your user count exceeds the threshold and now you're liable for outrageous fees that you can't afford. I guess one could limit the stream count for the station, but that won't work for AM since patrons each get a dedicated 128K stream, so unless the 56/24K streams get reduced each time a patron is added the limit would eventually be exceeded if the user base continues to grow. And at some point there would be no more free streams and the next patron to donate would put you over the limit.

Also notice that the per song fees proposed above arbitrarily increase over time. I guess I could see setting a current fee and then tying that fee to the consumer price index or something, but they more than double it from 2006 to 2010.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I'm just a small speck of dust in this matter, but from the perspective of a small indie producer, I am VERY happy to share our music (meaning the music of the various musicians who contributed their time and efforts to compile the CDs we have been releasing), which would otherwise have a much more limited exposure. In our case, we make no money on sales as it's contributed to help support our other online community and the band (Gentle Giant). The exposure and just the interaction with you all is priceless, and I think other indie artists feel the same. Our music can be heard here, without royalties. If you like what you hear, you will support that artist or band. I've done it, and I prefer a more open market that the new media allow us. I don't care to have a fat cat trying to follow what they think is a winning musical formula dictating what will be available to my ears.

Prog on, friends!

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

You, other indies and artists are all happy, in many cases overjoyed, to have a station like Aural Moon play the music.

What sticks in the back of my throat is that the RIAA runs to the LoC CRB demanding fees and they do NOT represent all of the indies and artists. I know Jim had said he'd remove ANY AND ALL material here that is under the auspices of the RIAA if/when ever their usurious fees go into effect. However, it seems to me they may enforce their demands by collecting play statistics from the stream replication services. That's going to be one hell of a lot of data to mine to see if everyone is paying the pye-dogs what they demand.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I think goo is probably right:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...-push-drm.html

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Do we really have a problem with this, unless our normal listening sw copes with it? I do not need the recording feature, although I used it to listen to shows I was not able to attend "live".

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

I guess my beef with it is that in the US (and probably elsewhere as well) we have the right to record broadcast content, I think VAX cited the relevant law earlier. It's just another fair use right the media companies are trying to take away IMHO.

They've already succeeded in basically extending copyright indefinitely, which pretty much removes the public domain for future works in my view. I have no problem with content creators receiving compensation for their work during their lifetime, but nowadays corporations who purchase the rights to the works are basically able to retain rights to the content ad infinitum, I have a problem with that, they didn't create it, they just purchased the rights to it and I think there should be some limit on that lest the classics die.

For example, if that had always been the case, it's quite possible that most of classical music would not be performed today since it might be cost prohibitive for a symphony to play it if they had to pay some corporation for the right to perform it. Similarly, libraries might cease to exist. It wouldn't surprise me if they go after that next.

Another thing music publishers are doing is trying to shut down sites that collect guitar tablature like http://olga.net which I have contributed to in a small way. Even tho I figured out the tune on my own and provided a description of how to play it (perhaps incorrectly), their desire to prevent me sharing that information undermines the sharing of knowledge that the internet facilitates so well. Of course if anybody thinks I'm full of it, I'd be interested to hear your take on it.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

True. There is much case law regarding the "fair use" doctrine of copyright law -- USC 17 §107. The general consensus reported from and about this case law is that it is OK for "personal use". Now, of course, the lawyers will argue what the term "personal use" and what the word "is" means! :P


Scary eh? Glad you too are abreast of what they are trying to take from us -- basic freedoms and privileges! Yessir! This is the good ol' US of Eh?.


Next?



Now that is just completely wrong. To me, that is a violation of free speech doctrine.

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

OK, time to contact your (US) congress critters again, looks like IREA is going down: http://www.wired.com/entertainment/m...EA_faces_music

Oh, and Sound Exchange is now on the warpath to go after *broadcast* radio fees, and is (illegally) using their funds to lobby: http://www.wired.com/entertainment/m...ning_post_0806

This whole thing is making me sicker & sicker!

Re: AM to operate after July 14?
 

Reduction of fees are still fees. Once it happens, it can only get worse. We'll just have to react accordingly. I almost hope the IREA doesn't pass. that would be admitting these robbers have a right to any money.