Though I don't like this much, a petition won't solve it. Already other broadcast stations, tv video shows, bars, pubs and some DJ shows have to pay these royalties. To think that the other medias and copyright holders are going to accept internet stations getting by for free is not realistic.

I think a petition giving non-profit, non-commercial streamers an exemption or reduced rate might have a better chance. Non-profit streamer are unlike the above examples who are normally "work for hire" or commercial operations. I think charging a non-profit streamer is like being charged for playing your favorite CD for friends at your party, ridiculous.

The other good news here is that much more free music is available for streamers on the internet.

One of my favorite net places.....
http://www.mp3unsigned.com/

Plaz

The problem is not with making it non-free. Just look at the royalties. they're per performance + per listener. This makes streaming radio very expensive. The statistics of my favorite station (a small one) say that it'll be almost 7000US$ per year (100 listeners, 10 songs per hour, non-commercial station, no banners, just donations). Scary. Totally non-proportional.

Jack

That's ridiculous, they will kill all the little independent stations that already struggle for survival.
That or a new form of spamming will be introduced (speaming!)

I think that this article is telling of how things will probably go. Even the "big guys" don't ask for a repeal of the new rules, but instead "asked for a reconsideration of key parts of the ruling".

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070319/internet_radio.html?.v=1

They're asking for cheaper rates, which I agree with. But free web broadcasting using music that belongs to the record companies just isn't going to fly. I would definitely like to see a petition for non-profit status/rates. In the mean time, use "free" music from other sources on the net. There's lots of great stuff out there if you look for it. Even some commercial bands/acts have released free tracks. The record companies must hate that.

Plaz

That's the problem. They shooting themselves in the foot.
People will go for other "free" sources of music, mainly piracy.
More piracy means it'll become a "norm". And then what?
Imho they should charge more moderate prices.
As far as I see streaming couple of channes costs about 90$ per month, 1080$ per year, adding to that 7000$ is death sentence for radio station that is financed by listeners donations.
Personally, if I happen to like the music I listen, it goes into my wish list and eventually the cd appears in the collection.
Last 50 cds were obtained that way: listen->like->buy.
The whole system, drm and now this, sucks.
I don't believe I own the music unless I have a cd in the case with sleeve notes etc.

Jack

Hi Jack,
Personally, if I happen to like the music I listen, it goes into my wish list and eventually the cd appears in the collection.

That's the way I 'see' jazz, but the radio stream promoted the artist and
got nothing from the transaction!

#29812

We agree, better rates should be worked out for playing tracks owned by record companies on the internet. Expecially the non-commercial stations we've mentioned. These stations can be helpful the the record companies. Watch what would happen if all the net stations switch to free unsigned artists.

And just to be clear, when I say "free" I don't mean pirating. There is ligitimate free music out there of all styles that is free of RIAA and copyright royalties. Artist and bands offer their music this way in hopes you buy the tracks you like any where from $.50-$2.00 a track. They are bypassing the big companies to make their music and money. Many of these artist would probably welcome internet broadcasters including their music in their rotation. It would bring new fans and revenue. Revenue that could be shared between the artists and station probably. Good for all in my opinion. Check out the mp3unsigned. com site. This is the way they work.

Those pirating copyrighted CD tracks, I can't agree with. If you like the track, buy it. There are ways to buy individual tracks now saving you the cost of buying a CD full of tracks you don't like or want. There's little excuse to pirate your favorite artist songs now. How much would this cost the average person? $25-$100 a year?

Pirated CD tracks are a different animal from radio stations. With an internet station, the music companies know right where to go to collect their checks, and they will.

Plaz

The trouble with this fee scheme, and to some extent with the ones already in place for conventional radio stations and whatnot... is that it's based on the greed of the record companies. They're trying to squeeze every dime they can out of the system, at every step of the way, along every path that they can, between the creation of a musical work and the listener's ear.

By trying to pry as much money out of the Internet radio world that they can, however, they're actually killing the goose that lays the golden egg. In fact, they're unknowingly accelerating their own destruction... their own dinosaurhood.

It is like a bunch of saurians conspiring to make a certain giant asteroid strike the Earth, because they think that, at the moment it strikes, it will cause money to spring from the ground in great abundance, flying high into the sky and coming back down again, where they can catch it all in their great many buckets... when in reality it will totally wipe out the saurians forever!

As someone else pointed out, they are guaranteeing that they'll be bypassed by those that don't want to be price-gouged... while also killing the now-growing mechanism that actually reveals new albums to people who'd otherwise never come across them.

In short, they're destroying the market while convincing themselves that they're saving the market from destruction. Short-sited, blundering fools.

As it happens, though, there is quite alot of major ruckus being raised over this Internet radio fees thing, by large and powerful people... so it is far from over, and far from certain how it will turn out. This online petition is probably only a minor cog in this matter. It's probably still worth it to add your names to the petition, though. I have already, but then I'm here in the USA, so I'm actually one of the people it directly impacts upon.

@Plaz
Quote:

That's why I wrote ``other "free" ''

Quote:

I'm not happy with this scheme. I listen to the artists that are signed (most of them). And this online per-track purchasing scheme isn't my cup of tea. I want it on a CD with a sleeve notes in there. But that's matter of preference and music style.

Quote:

It ain't that cheap. Here we (my wife and me) are spending about 300$ per year, and it's 2 big purchases, mostly sale items. And the shop isn't expensive (relatively). The stuff is overpriced in general.

Jack