Okay, fair 'nuff.

 

haha fine with me here, they gonna go after the radio stations next? screw em, i can do without their shizz anyways

 

I hummed a tune that was stuck in my head. I was afraid they'd sue me. I'm just going to do what Kanye West does and change one note. That way I'll just say it's my new music and not a copy at all....

 

ROFL good idea! So I now have a full KyuBlime album commin out, just gotta change afew notes here and there!!

 

They are only asking for like 5-10k per year from the radio stations, which IMO is perfectly fair considering the radio stations are using copyrighted content to make hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars per year in advertising revenue without giving the music label a dime (unless the music label chooses to pay to have a song blasted).

Now, although I think it sucks as well as a young adult, being objective the RIAA perfectly has the right to do that. I don't like it, but they have the right to say you can't copy that music onto your computer because you are making a derivative work--and as we all know, this is illegal in many other respects.

Example:

You pay $200-300 for a copy of your OS (e.g. Microsoft Vista). That $2-300 allows you several limited copies of the OS. It's not like you pay $200-300 and get to install it on every computer in your house (if you house has more copies than the license allows for). That's how Bill Gates made his money. If a business buys a license for Windows, he doesn't just pay $200 for 1000 computers, but X amt for Yamt of computers.

Now what the RIAA is trying to say is that each time you buy a CD, you only licensed that song for absolutely one derivative of that work. So you only have 1 copy of that song and making more would be derivatives that you have not licensed.

Perfectly fair game if they get it passed. Good business move/good PR? DEFINITELY NOT.

They are going to piss off a lot of ppl that don't understand business/copyright law (their target demos--teenagers) and most of them are going to go to illegal methods of distribution such as P2P networks.

Not too smart, but then again the RIAA is winning a lot of court cases these days.

 

Radio stations have been paying for years. They have just been paying the songwriters and composers through BMI and ASCAP. If you just performed it, I don't feel sorry for you. Maybe this will keep the real musicians in the game.

The radio, record label (and their artist) all need each other. The radio stations are needed by the record labels to drive demand on air and get adds (a new song in rotation on a radio station). To do that the artists give up a few things. Upset that balance and I believe the industry is in for a much harder time then they are going through now.

 

I don't think they have been paying for years. If so, then what is the upheaval about? My understanding is that they have no been paying, and they maybe forced to in the future.

IMO, it shouldn't really upset the balance too much. Considering paying royalties is standard treatment for other countries, and their radio stations are just fine imo.

 

Well it used to be that radio stations didn't pay much or any because they were the exposure for the companies. SO the radio stations made money on advertising, but the record companies got money from people hearing the music and going out and buying the music. The problem is that these days it's so easy to get the music without paying for it that the revenue stream has dissapeared from music sales. I still think it needs a different marketing strategy. Kind of like how the movie companies changed. They thought theaters would die when video rental came out, but they intensified the movie experience by offering the surround sound and some other things. They also suppored the rental industry by adding features to the DVD's that you couldn't get in the movie. They changed their marketing strategy and are making more money.

 

Re-read my thread.

Only the performing artists haven't been payed by the radio stations. Performing artists usually don't play and instrument or write songs that are copyrighted; think Britney Spears. Radio has long payed BMI and ASCAP which takes care of those copyrighted songs. If you write your own music and lyrics you get royalties. The industry has changed however to a bunch of people that just lend their voices. I believe this is the reason for the push from the RIAA.

The artists and record labels lean on Radio to make things a hit so they've always given them leway on the performance aspect of it. If the RIAA changes that, the stations are going to be much more picky about new music and only playing familiar hits. Good luck to the record business then.

Just to further tell you how far this has gone, if you own a bar that has cover bands perform the bar owner also needs to pay BMI, ASCAP and RIAA fees. Each one is seperate, each one is a lot of money. All of my past bar/club clients have had to quit live music in their establishments. A few years ago we had a swarm of BMI and ASCAP lawyers descend on Columbus. I'm not saying they don't have the right but....

The whole industry needs a paradigm shift. The RIAA better find a way to do it without cutting their own throats.

 

So I guess that means we have to go back to carrying Discman portable CD players when we go out jogging????

Personally, I don't think this is going to fly.