No Way! – webcasters tell SoundExchange
p2pnet news | Radio:- The latest take it or leave it “offer” made by SoundExchange on behalf of the recording industry, “has done nothing to further negotiations,” say thousands of webcasters, declaring they’re determined to stand firm by rejecting the most recent Copyright Royalty Rate (CRB) proposal made by SoundExchange.
“The latest proposal made by SoundExchange is extremely disappointing, at a time where we need real progress, not hollow tricks,” SaveNetRadio spokesperson Jake Ward says in a statement.
“While the clock continues to tick for webcasters, SoundExchange continues to play games with their good faith. The resounding rejection of this offer should serve as a reminder to SoundExchange, and to Congress, that the webcasting community is intent on a lasting and fair resolution to this issue, and willing to fight for it.”
Fourteen webcasters say in a statement:
We, the undersigned have made it very clear to the SoundExchange exactly why this latest offer is unrealistic and unacceptable. Its terms are not viable for webcasters seeking to run profitable businesses. One such term is the newly added Aggregate Tuning Hour (ATH) cap which immediately makes many mid-level webcasters ineligible for the recently presented agreement. For stations with revenues far below the $1.25 million cap, but with healthy listener bases, this ATH cap forces payments at the CRB rates. This deal is not feasible for anyone who wants to grow their business. It contains the aforementioned $1.25 million revenue cap, which limits growth and puts in place a dangerously low hard ceiling for revenue generation. The Small Business Administration revenue cap for over-the-air broadcasters to be considered a small business is $6.5 million — this would seem a fair cap, with precedent.
Also, the offer only covers copyright holders that are SoundExchange members, of which there are approximately 20,000. Between us, the undersigned webcasters played far more artists than that in the last year. Under the SoundExchange offer for artists not on that limited roster, webcasters would have to pay at the bankruptcy-level rates, which were set in the fatally flawed Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) ruling in March. Those CRB rates were condemned by webcasters, the press and members of Congress and deemed as wildly out of line and detrimental to all parties concerned — including the RIAA.
We have asked for a reasonable, long-term solution, not one that is subject to increase at the whim of the record industry every five years. 2010 is little more than 2 years away, and it would be difficult for any business owner to accurately forecast profits and build a successful business model with a huge expense variable looming in the future.
Although several of the webcasters listed below are currently involved in direct negotiations with SoundExchange, the process remains exceedingly slow and increasingly unpromising. In the continuing absence of a genuine offer that would allow internet radio to continue to be the vital medium for new music discovery we implore our listeners and fans of internet radio to continue to urge your legislative representatives to pass the Internet Radio Equality Act (HR2060, S.1353).
For information on how you can contact your representative, please visit http://www.savenetradio.org.
Signed:
- Jeff Bachmeier, .977
- Val Starr, GotRadio.com, 100hitz.com
- Rusty Hodge, Somafm.com
- Rick White, BigR Radio. 1faith.fm
- Donnie Mowbray, 181.fm
- Kurt Hanson, AccuRadio
- Dave Landis, Ultimate 80’s
- Bill Goldsmith, Radio Paradise
- Ted Leibowitz, BagelRadio
- Sal Amato, Dot1media
- Brandon Casci, Loud City
- Jim & Wanda Atkinson, 3WK
- Ari Shopat, Digitally Imported
- Mike Roe, Radio IO
Definitely stay tuned
Also See:
statement – Webcasters Stand Firm , September 19, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:19 am
SoundExchange simply lives in the pocket of large business interests who have every interest in turning net radio into advert saturated crap and/or hefty subscription based services. To them it is an abomination for the public to be able to listen to music for “free” without their commercials (or paying for it). That’s the only thing they want, and that’s all they will ever offer…
September 21st, 2007 at 1:57 am
i may not have understood this right. does soundexchange collect all royalty’s or only those for its clients only? if these rates are only linked to big music why not just eliminate all soundexchange songs?
what would the cost be to start there own version of soundexchange vs the cost of paying sound exchange what they want.
or reduce there air time. internet radio is best for small markets e.g christian rock, traditional american indian music, ambiant etc… if i was to be in the mood for anything else then FM radio is for big music.
September 21st, 2007 at 7:14 am
You know, if anybody’s mind still isn’t made up about SoundExchange … just go take a cursory look at their press releases.
Once you’ve OD’d on the BS, doubletalk, lies and mischaracterizations, you’ll know where the good fight lies.
September 21st, 2007 at 8:18 am
One could always broadcast music that doesn’t involve the RIAA. Heh.
September 21st, 2007 at 12:03 pm
I believe SoundExchange has been given the right to collect fees for ALL music, not just it’s members. The only way around it is to make deals directly with the artists whose songs you are playing.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:51 am
“I believe SoundExchange has been given the right to collect fees for ALL music, not just it’s members.”
And how is Sound Exchange supposed to find people who are not members? From what I have read they are not all that aggressive in tracking down people who are associated with them, it is not likely they are conducting any kind of search for non members who are owed money. Isn’t it a conflict of interest that this is a spin off organization from the RIAA and not a truly independent entity? Isn’t the fact that Sound Exchange gets to keep unpaid royalties a huge disincentive for it to find people?