This just in....

[rowangolightly]

Just heard back from my Representative...nice to know that somebody in Sullivan's office actually follows up on this stuff whether or not it's actually him. It's not what I'd call a good answer but at least its an answer.




Dear Susi,

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding the decision by the
Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) regarding the determination of rates and terms
for webcasting. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to
respond.

On March 2, 2007 the CRB, a federal agency created by the United States
Congress, was tasked with updating royalty compensation rates for music
performers which expired at the end of 2005. These updated and subsequently
increased royalty fees are to be paid by Internet Radio stations for streaming
music during the years 2006-2010. The CRB's three-judge panel, created to set
digital music royalty rates, decided to increase the rates retroactive to 2006 for
companies that stream music over the Internet. The increase will apply to small
and large broadcasters alike, as well as Internet simulcasts of traditional over-
the-air radio stations.

Currently, Internet broadcasters must pay royalties for the use of a song to music
publishing organizations like the American Society of Composers, Authors and
Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Media, Inc. (BMI) for the public
performance rights to the song itself. Additionally, they must also pay royalties
that compensate the performers of the music. However, traditional over-the-air
broadcasters are only required to pay for the performance rights to a song. They
are not required to pay royalties to performers. The CRB's decision to raise the
music performer compensation royalties, which only Internet broadcasters must
pay, is creating what some perceive as an unfair imbalance in an environment
where the ultimate goal should be an ability for Americans to have fair access to
music, while allowing those with legitimate intellectual property rights just
compensation.

As a result of this decision, parity in radio rates has come in to focus and been
addressed in Congressional hearings regarding the direction of the future of
radio. As a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I too am a
proponent of innovation and share your belief that we should accelerate
technological advancement in a fair and balanced manner. As issues regarding
the future of radio come before me, I will keep your thoughts in mind and
continue to fight for technological progress, innovation, and fairness.

It is an honor to serve you in Washington. If you would like more information
on this issue, or would like to share your thoughts with me via e-mail, you may
visit my website at sullivan.house.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me again
should you have further concerns on federal legislation or programs.


*sigh* Funny, I nor any other musician/performer/songwriter I know gets paid royalties on any of our music, even the stuff we write. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't have a good feeling about the end result of this.

Comments

[grian-eun.livejournal.com]

...Did he actually say anything with all those words?

It's a very political answer: it doesn't even answer your question, let alone take a side on the issue. And I thought corporate weasel-speak was bad.

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

No, he didn't...not one damned thing.

[docjeff.livejournal.com]

I don't like it when they rehash what the CRB is/why it was formed. That's just useless filler for the letter. :(

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

Yeah but, see, if he didn't put something in there like that he couldn't hide that he didn't actually say anything in the form letter.

[imbri6.livejournal.com]

You *are* a performer, with published music, who hasn't and probably will never, ever see a dime back from any internet broadcast of your music. His answer might seem "ok" to someone who is not a performer, but you *are*, and my gut feeling is that he needs to know that. You're a performer/songwriter as are a LOT of folks you know, and you're not getting any money. Which strongly begs the question... where *is* the $$ going?

If you write him back (and I do hope that you will), I look forward to seeing his next response.

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

Ah but I'm not a member of ASSWIPE, er ASCAP so it wouldn't do any good.

We all know where the money is going; into the pockets of ASCAP and BMI shareholders and executives.

[youngraven.livejournal.com]

I'd be willing to bet that most performers you know (yourselves included) haven't got ASCAP or BMI memberships, and thus you aren't paid royalties. In the past, I've toyed with the idea of a membership to either, as I would like a bit of protection for my work (and if I'm after making my living at music - which is my goal - I can hardly consider desiring royalties sinful. I know some people are purists and would not dream of that). The trouble is that those are captive agencies, and regardless of how many forms I fill in, they will not protect me. So I suppose I'm cast adrift without...well, without a boat. Bad spot to be in, innit?

[jehosefatz.livejournal.com]

Well, if you're a folk / traditional / etc artist I wouldn't expect to get much out of ASCAP or this rate hike or anything else coming out of the musical establishment. The only thing this move will do is shut down avenues for exposure and further consolidate the market in the hands of the big publishers.

I already did my my writing... and I'm a member of ASCAP, not for royalty protection but for the the insurance and misc. other benefits... for all the good it's ever done me. If you're not charting, you're not going to get paid.

- Jeho

Chartsy-schmartsy

[youngraven.livejournal.com]

I'd have to magically swop lives with Ani D., and I think she'd fight me hammer and tongs and likely win.

She's got more piercings than I have, and that would hurt. But you're very right - I've yet to sell 1,000 copies of the first album I recorded 12 years ago. I'm not even a molecule.

[butterflybill.livejournal.com]

That looks like a typical form letter that they send back. Is there any way you can talk to him in person?

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

Do you honestly think it would do any good if I did? Perhaps I'm too cynical but I think it'd be shameful waste of my time. Their staffs primary job is to protect them from actual contact with actual citizens unless, of course, they're running for office.

[son-of-dust.livejournal.com]

If you visit his office, you would be surprised at how attentive they become.

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

*grin* I wonder how attentive they'd get for a whole busload of rennies!

[son-of-dust.livejournal.com]

only if they were registered to vote

[youngraven.livejournal.com]

Why, yes, the Senate is something of a whorehouse, innit?

[jcw-da-dmg.livejournal.com]

Nobody I know gets a penny from ASSCRAP, BMi, or RIAA.

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

Oh somebody spouted off to me that they did when I was complaining on a site somewhere, sometime. I figured then that it had to also be somebody they've hired to spy on other venues and musical groups. That's the only way I can see that somebody could actually make money offa being a member of one of those organizations.