Court Denies Stay Of Webcast Royalty Hike

from the how-much-does-silence-cost? dept

An appeals court in Washington has denied the appeal of a group of webcasters, and the new, drastically increased rates will take effect on July 15. The head of SoundExchange, which could stand to rake in billions in "administrative fees", says the decision is "a major victory for recording artists and record labels". It's hard to see how that's the case, since should the new rates stand, the overwhelming effect will be a decrease in the amount of exposure artists get, and the number of times their music is heard -- not the dramatic increase in revenues he seems to be hinting at. Should these rates stand, and the RIAA succeeds in hitting broadcast radio stations with royalties (which we presume the SoundExchange boss would call another "major victory"), major-label music could suffer from a huge loss of exposure, which would translate into a huge drop in sales that would surely outweigh any revenue gains from the new royalties. Sounds like yet another way the record labels have figured out to destroy themselves. Update: As noted in the comments, SoundExchange says it won't enforce the new royalties yet, and will continue to negotiate them with webcasters.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: royalties, webcast
Companies: riaa


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Lutomes, 12 Jul 2007 @ 9:16pm

    Of course...

    Once the new royalty rates are put in place. The RIAA etc will be able to claim that the drop in music sales is a result of "Pirate Internet Radio" from all the unlicensed internet radio stations that offer free streaming of various playlists. (regardless of whether the music played is signed to the RIAA or just independent work)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    DrScum, 12 Jul 2007 @ 9:41pm

    are you on crack? the "group of webcasters" won.

    http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/07/breaking-news-o.html

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trollificus, 12 Jul 2007 @ 9:57pm

    Dude, hardly on crack, and hardly a

    As of 5:08PM, it was a done deal, see:

    http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/07/soundexchange-t.html

    If you have updates on the story, post them as such, and you did, and thanks.

    But I stand by my 'sandpaper dildo' comment...as opposed to trusting the RIAA and calling this a 'win'.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trollificus, 12 Jul 2007 @ 10:02pm

    Ummm...the NON-POSTED 'sandpaper dildo' comment...

    ...was along the lines that you were a tool for referring to a situation in which the webcasters lost in the court of appeals and were saved from extinction by nothing but the tender mercies of SoundExchange as a "win".

    It is clearly not, and I said they were only waiting for the RIAA to determine what size and abasiveness of dildo was suitable to rape them (the webcasters) with.

    Not sure if it was the word 'rape' or the number all-caps words I had in that post that triggered some kind of review...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trollificus, 12 Jul 2007 @ 10:03pm

    Clearly, it was the all-caps...

    ...sorry.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    DrScum, 12 Jul 2007 @ 10:16pm

    my bad, sorry, I just looked it up and posted.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Yeow, 13 Jul 2007 @ 12:14am

    All the stations need to just combine their songs into 1 very big mp3 file

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Rob, 13 Jul 2007 @ 3:31am

    this article is inaccurate.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Sanguine Dream, 13 Jul 2007 @ 5:55am

    I'm confused...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    trollificus, 13 Jul 2007 @ 10:35am

    *sigh*

    There were a flurry of reports yesterday about the adverse (to the webcasters) decision regarding the CRB's outrageous fees in the court of appeals. I saw similar stories on /. and the Reg, too.

    DrScum apparently first saw the NEW news-that SoundExchange had agreed to NOT impose the new fees and would enter negotiations to find something more realistic, and thought the story poster was being an idiot.

    I stupidly flamed him (which flame, fortunately, was blocked for an excess of ALL CAPS) before I figured out the sequence of events. Sorry.

    Read the link Dr posted. It explains the current state of the situation, which, I will submit, is still pretty perilous for the webcasters. Call your Congresscritter today!! I did.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    King Kamehameha, 16 Jul 2007 @ 6:29pm

    correlation

    Quite interesting that the points about decreased exposure will inevitably lead to less revenue because of a drop in sales; so closely correlates with trying to increase govt. coffers by increasing taxes on an activity.

    Because of course if you make it harder for people to do said activity, there would never be a drop in said activity.


    good synopsis.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jeff, 20 Jul 2007 @ 2:19pm

    The large webcasters such as clearchannel and yahoo and google have been getting off cheap. They have the infrastructure and the audience that the advertisers want and will pay for. They make money from them and have an overhead not commencerate with the revenue generated by every recording artist and every label/publishers they use to generate audience.

    This is a good deal for the artist. The ones that should be paid if any money is made from the use of their product.

    If a new artist or a flegling webcaster is not in the position to be paid yet.....keep trying. The rich should not get richer off my sweat.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.