Re: Judges Reject Appeals From Webcasters
- From: "arlene" <nedster6@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:33:52 -0800
oh good! I'll go there!
----- Original Message -----
From: Sarah
To: winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Judges Reject Appeals From Webcasters
Not really. I just signed a petition and sent some lletters to my local
congress poeple. Go to http://www.savenetradio.org for more info.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Canazzi
To: winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: Judges Reject Appeals From Webcasters
And this means the effective end of independent Internet Radio.
Within 2 years, Internet broadcasting will be like cable TV: Five people
determining what ye shall hear and what ye shall see.
----- Original Message -----
From: "djc" <djc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 11:46 AM
Subject: Judges Reject Appeals From Webcasters
Judges Reject Appeals From Webcasters
Sites Can Tally Fees Per Listening Hours
POSTED: 6:59 pm PDT April 16, 2007
UPDATED: 6:59 pm PDT April 16, 2007
LAS VEGAS --
Internet radio broadcasters were dealt a setback Monday when a panel of
copyright
judges threw out requests to reconsider a ruling that hiked the royalties
they must
pay to record companies and artists.
A broad group of public and private broadcasters, including radio stations,
small
startup companies, National Public Radio and major online sites like Yahoo
Inc. and
Time Warner Inc.'s AOL, had objected to the new royalties set March 2,
saying they
would force a drastic cutback in services that are now enjoyed by some 50
million
people.
In the latest ruling, the Copyright Royalty Board judges denied all motions
for rehearing
and also declined to postpone a May 15 deadline by which the new royalties
will have
to be collected.
However, they did grant leniency on one point, allowing the webcasters to
calculate
fees by average listening hours, as they had been, as opposed to the new
system of
charging a royalty each time every song is heard by an online listener.
That exemption
counts for last year and this year. After that, the new per-song,
per-listener fee
structure goes into effect.
Many webcasters say the sharply higher royalty fees will put them out of
business.
Talk of the ruling dominated a one-day meeting of Internet radio
broadcasters being
held in Las Vegas alongside the annual conference of the National
Association of
Broadcasters, a group representing local radio and TV stations.
N. Mark Lam, the CEO of Live365 Inc., a privately held company that
aggregates audio
streams from thousands of radio stations and other small webcasters, said
that under
the new royalty rules, "there is no industry."
Lam, who joined the venture capital-backed company about two years ago,
said Live365
just barely broke even last year and had about 4.5 million unique listeners
every
month.
Also on Monday, several Internet radio broadcasters announced a campaign to
raise
awareness of the issue and encourage listeners to write to their
representatives
in Congress.
Small broadcasters have received relief from Congress in the past,
benefiting from
a law passed five years ago that gave them a break on royalty rates. The
legislation
allowed them to pay about 12 percent of their revenues instead of having to
calculate
per-song, per-hour rates like larger companies had to.
David Oxenford, a lawyer representing several webcasters, said the next
step was
likely an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit,
but he noted that process could take at least a year. Meanwhile, he said,
the prospects
of successfully getting a court to block the decision of the royalty board
judges
is slim.
SoundExchange, a nonprofit group that collects the online royalties from
webcasters
and distributes them to record labels and artists, hailed the ruling in a
statement
and said it looked forward to working with Internet radio companies in
order to ensure
that the industry succeeds.
Jonathan Potter, the head of the Digital Media Association, which
represents several
large webcasters including Yahoo, AOL and Microsoft Corp.'s MSN network,
said his
group was not currently in talks with SoundExchange but may be soon. He
said his
group and other webcasters would be turning to Congress, where he said he
sees "a
lot of legislative support."
The royalties in question only cover digital transmissions of music, and
don't apply
to terrestrial radio stations, as traditional radio play is seen as a
benefit for
record labels by promoting sales of recorded music. Both digital
broadcasters and
regular radio stations pay a separate royalty to the publishers and
composers of
music.
djc's Jukebox: http://paulmerrell.net:9212 or
http://paulmerrell.net:9660 Saturday Evenings 9 to midnight Eastern.
My Journal http://livejournal.com/users/djc1
email Or Msn: djc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I C Q Number Is: 4781694
To post a message to the list, send it to winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please send a message to:
winamp4theblind-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the
subject line.
Archives located at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/winamp4theblind>
If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or
the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list directly.
Instead, please contact
the list owners at winamp4theblind-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To post a message to the list, send it to winamp4theblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please send a message to:
winamp4theblind-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the
subject line.
Archives located at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/winamp4theblind>
If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or
the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list directly.
Instead, please contact
the list owners at winamp4theblind-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.1/765 - Release Date: 4/17/2007 5:20
PM
Other related posts:
