sorry, when i hear 24 cents for a ringtone to the music publisher. i think to myself.... whats the problem with the RIAA asking for a royalty for artists who perform on that ringtone which is higher than the songwriters royalty, or at least equilvilent.
sorry, but if an artist performs a song, that ought be equal or higher than the songwriter royalty. which in many cases are different people.
also, artists ought to get performance royalties from radio airplay, for a long time, artists in any other country get radio royalties from airplay on commercial radio, but in the US it is mainly limited to songwriters only, unless it is from digital radio.
sorry, this needs to change. artists get screwed, not only from income in the usa, but around the world, US artists dont get royalties from other countries at all, but artists from say Canada , UK or asia do.
my god, i just don't get this. Performers getting a radio royalty is a great thing. other countries around the world offer this performance royalty, which gets paid by radio stations. Artists from canada, EU and Asia get paid. but american artists dont get paid from around the world.
sorry, but here i think the evil is the NAB, which has successfully prevented artists getting a matching performance royalty to what songwriters get. This is only a good thing. helps artists earn a living when say someone like SAM MOORE can't tour to get an income.
this is just and right, can't believe so many people are embittered against it, this has nothing to do with big or small record labels. this is about artists rights, and it is only good for artists. if passed, small and large artists to get income for their work. not tons, but a lil. and when all these p2p network or websites are out there making it hard to get income from record sales, this radio income is important
Sorry but i kinda think this is poised in a loaded question manner.
for me i am concerned about alot of these issues
1- Net Neutrality, but only in LEGAL methods, not because i believe anyone has a right to steal music, movies and other programming over the net. I think anything that protects ILLEGAL behavior like that is bull$hit.
2- Government intrusion into peoples private life and what they do on their own computers, emails and such. that said i believe certain protections and government investigation is needed. ie to protect against kiddie porn and crap like that.
3- Phishing and Spyware, are huge problems. for trojans and other such things to take over your computer because you visited a website? just crazy and needs to be protected against.
but for all of this to be used by so many of you to be anti-artist, anti-copyright, anti-filmmaker, anti-software developer?
cmon, when i hear someone like john, post 25, actually have the audacity to believe that people don't like to earn money and that people don't have a right to earn a living is ridiculous. Sorry, yes i agree with alot of artists that these arguments in support of piracy are crazy.
all arguments that support allowing p2p and stealing of content actually do more to threaten the future of creativity than anything else.
but as for big brother and spying on citizen's... i aint for that. well except to stop people from breaking the law. especially in the case of piracy and kiddie porn.
but of course even these threats need to have supervision and make sure the watchdogs are watched.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Mitch D.