Friday, June 21, 2002

So much to talk about, so little time to write. I really want to come back to the whole religion and marketing thing, but the DMCA CARP ruling is more of a bummer than anything else.

Not that I'm surprised in the least that the ruling went down the way it did. But still very dissappointed.

Do the little guys have any chance anymore?

"On February 20, 2002, however, the CARP arbitrators issued their recommendation — .14¢ per song per listener (that's $.0014) for Internet-only webcasters, .07¢ per song per listener ($.0007) for broadcast radio simulcasts, and .02¢ per song per listener($.0002) for non-commercial radio simulcasts." From RAIN website.

This pretty much means no more internet radio unless they do a subscription thing or something like that. WZRD has been off the web for a little while now. WNUR, WFMU and others can't be far behind. Thousands will cease webcasting. Just when I thought there was potential to break the mold of commercial radio and it's killed... By the Recording Industry no less. Some Artists group on NPR said they were happy and even said that there could have been better rates. That's really sad....

Thew whole thing seems like a mess because it's really two really evil groups going after each other and trampling other groups like independent artists, independent webcasters, etc. The RIAA wanted the CARP thing because they are already getting soaked with the whole "indie promotion" scam that is effectively Payola for the new millenium. The radio stations that currently webcast didn't want it because that would mean more money out of pocket, and advertising is already slumping now. Artists like Don Henley feel they're owed this CARP thing because they've been getting shafted by RIAA for the past.... since record labels started! Music performers got screwed in the very first initial agreement with radio broadcasters way back when....

I'm no expert but what little I do know is that performers get nothing from radio airplay. Based on the agreement with the music publishers in radio's infancy, the agreement was that the royalty fees were paid to the publishing organizations, the song publisher got royalties, but to my knowledge the performer got nothing off of radio. I don't know why that happened, but it's been that way ever since. Performers only receive payment from record sales. So when a band plays a cover, (Say Alien Ant Farm playing "Smooth Criminal") and it gets radio airplay the royalties go to the author of the song, not the performers . No wonder Michael Jackson never plays the USA - he's got all that extra money burning a hole in his pocket and so many little boys selling themselves in Thailand.

SESAC, ASCAP and BMI sell the licenses, collect fees, and pay the authors of the music. For a rock band or the average singer songwriter that's not a big deal. But for classical muscians who perform in orchestras etc. they get nothing. That's why the musicians union was behind the CARP ruling, because of the bum deal they got 60+ years ago. I guess their logic was "since we got screwed way back when we'll extract the monies we should be getting thru this new medium, the internet" It's all just very sad.

I mean hell, I know what's like to be a musician and struggle, live cheap, sink your own cash into your livelyhood. But this act really won't protect those people. It just means more money for Don Henley... and granted artists that have record contracts that haven't sold that much. As for the bands struggling to get their music out there and their only outlet being independent radio, well......

This whole mess wouldn't be so bad if little college stations like WZRD and others were allotted more than 100 watts. Reception isn't very good outside a little radius of the station. I feel really bad for people in Alaska and North Dakota and really anywhere there isn't a decent college station. Even only a couple of miles away from the station my reception at home is not that good. The bad guys win again.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home