BY
KURT HANSON
In yesterday's issue of RAIN (here),
Broadcast.com founder and current Dallas Mavericks owner Mark
Cuban revealed his thinking behind the licensing deal
he helped put together between Yahoo! Broadcast and the RIAA in
1999.
That deal has become incredibly significant, because both
the recent Internet radio CARP arbitration panel and, subsequently,
Librarian of (CONTINUED
BELOW)
,,,
LAST
CHANCE to include YOUR firm please join us!
Call Kurt at 1-312-527-3879 or e-mail
us here.
...
(FROM ABOVE)
Congress James Billington have used it as the template for the
entire industry's royalty structure.
Many of the "RAIN Reader Feedback" pieces (see "Reader
Feedback" below) that came in to RAIN yesterday were along
the lines of "Those Yahoo! bastards!" and "Conspiracy!"
and, as such, I feel compelled to write this piece to clarify a couple
of key points.
Cuban and Yahoo! were, in my opinion, acting entirely legitimately,
as savvy businesspeople in a free-market system.
In trying to improve their business prospects, they were acting no
differently than, say, Starbucks negotiating favorable pricing
on coffee beans by committing to buy them in thousand-ton quantities,
in an effort to give them an advantage over neighborhood coffeehouses.
There is nothing wrong with that!
Here's what's wrong: Imagine if an agency
of the federal government stepped in and enacted regulations
requiring that, from now on, all
coffee bean purchases for all
coffeehouses must be in thousand-ton quantities. That
regulation would drive neighborhood coffee houses out of
business!
And
that is almost exactly what the Librarian of Congress has done!
In accepting the CARP's interpretationof the "willing
buyer/willing seller" rule, including the decision that they
had to look at actual deals (and
that the Yahoo!/RIAA deal was the only legitimate marketplace deal),
Billington has forced deal terms that were favorable
for the biggest company in the industry (which Yahoo! was
at the time), and unfavorable
for smaller firms, on the entire industry.
And that will kill the smaller firms and probably drive the
midsized ones (including the webcasting initiatives of broadcasters)
out of the space. And that was not the intent
of the statutory license!
Will Congress let it stand? Will the RIAA come through
with a reasonable voluntary license for smaller webcasters? We'll
see shortly!
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
From the press release: "Voice
of Webcasters (VOW), a coalition of small commercial webcasters
formed to promote
Internet radio, today decried the June 20, 2002 decision by the
Library of Congress establishing royalty rates to be paid by webcasters
for the performance of recorded music on the Internet.
"The Librarian's decision lowered the rates proposed
by a Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel ('CARP'), which had suggested
even higher rates to the Library in February.
"'These rates, while lower than those proposed by the
CARP, are still so high that they will drive small Internet radio
stations out of business, and
impose such a high barrier to entry that only
the largest corporations will
be in a position to establish new webcast operations,' said Mike
Roe [left], VOW member and President of RadioIO.
'As these rates will put small, commercial webcasters out of business,
we have no choice but to fight this decision
in courts and in Congress, unless the music industry
will finally answer our calls to join with us in reaching a mutually
agreeable solution.'
"VOW also condemned the current CARP structure that
doesn't allow for small, commercial businesses to participate, and
is currently based on 'willing buyer, willing seller' agreements
that may not accurately reflect a copyright market value that is
representative of the entire industry...
"VOW believes that fair rates and terms for royalties
to performers should exist, but must be based on %
of revenue, similar to those paid to the performing rights
organizations for the copyrights on musical compositions...
"VOW is planning further activities to protest this
decision, and to continue informing the public and Congress on the
ramifications of last week's announcement."
From an editorial in the San Jose Mercury News: "Webcasters
got some help last week in their continuing dispute with the
record industry. But the relief won't be enough for most Internet
radio stations to thrive and for many to survive. It's time for
Congress to intervene on their
behalf.
"In a much anticipated decision, the Librarian
of Congress cut in half the performance royalties that Internet-only
radio stations will have to pay artists and the record labels to
broadcast their music. He set it at the same rate -- 7 cents per
100 listeners per song -- that AM or FM stations would have to pay
to transmit their broadcasts on the Internet...
"The recording industry says it's open to negotiating
with small Webcasters, but the Webcasters say there's been no good-faith
discussions,
and time is quickly running out. In October, Webcasters must pay
four years' worth of royalties, retroactive to 1998. If nothing's
settled by then, many may go dark. Internet radio would begin to
resemble broadcast radio, dominated
by a handful of corporations and homogenous programming. A diverse,
vibrant part of the Internet would disappear before it had a chance
to develop.
"Congress must not let that happen. It created the
performance royalty and imposed it exclusively on Internet radio.
It established the process by which it was to be set.
"That process has failed, and must be changed, quickly."
Read this entire editorial from yesterday's San Jose Mercury
Newshere.
From Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher: "On
Radio Del Ray the other
day, deejay Michael Del Colliano came out of a Doors tune to note
that 'incidentally, Jim Morrison went to high school right down
the street from Studio B here. 'A few minutes later came a plug
for St. Elmo's Coffee Pub, a neighbor of the
Alexandria radio station and host to its regular concerts featuring
local musicians...
"On the Internet for the past few years, people who
missed the community that radio once provided -- and people who
crave the kinds of music radio has banished -- have found something
new and fresh...
"But the sounds of freedom dimmed last week, when the
Librarian of Congress, James Billington, decreed a fee scale that's
likely to silence most Internet stations.
"Billington approved a structure that lets traditional
broadcast stations pay royalties only to the writers and publishers
of songs they play, while Web stations must pay those fees plus
extra royalties to the record companies and performers of the music...
"The big companies that produce most recordings and
program much of radio fear seeing their
audience splinter into such tiny pieces that advertisers
would no longer see value in paying for airtime.
"This is the same kind of strategy that last week led
Circuit City to wipe videotapes off its shelves. Never mind that
virtually all
Americans have VCRs and only 30 percent have DVD players. We have
offended our corporate overlords
by taping too many movies, and we must be punished by being forced
to adopt a technology that offers Hollywood more
control over how we use their product.
"Similarly, the fraying of radio ratings and the decline
in music CD sales turns any alternative -- no matter how tiny --
into a threat. Thus, the incipient demise of Internet radio, even
though only about 20 percent of Americans have listened to it."
Read Fisher's column today in the Washington Post,
or online here.
From Streaming Magazine: "Loudeye
today announced that approximately 37 percent
of the companys current workforce will be
affected by a restructuring that will include layoffs and pay-cuts
[CFO Brad Berg has reportedly
been let go]. Upon completion of the restructuring, the company
will retain approximately 130 full-time permanent employees...
"In addition to the headcount reductions and other cost
containment actions, executives at the company have accepted a ten
percent salary reduction. The company expects to record
a charge of approximately $1.7 million in the second quarter related
to these actions.
"'We are determined to reach operating cash flow break-even
by the end of the year while maintaining sufficient capital reserves,'
said John T. Baker, Loudeye
chairman and chief executive officer. 'It is clear we must both
grow revenues and reduce costs to achieve these targets. Today's
announcement demonstrates our steadfast commitment to take the measures
required to reach our goals.'"
Here's feedback on our
lead story yesterday, "Cuban says Yahoo!'s RIAA deal was designed
to stifle competition!" (in
RAINhere).
"It
was widely known that this was Yahoo!'s strategy..."
The only thing that surprised me in your coverage today of
the RIAA/Yahoo! deal is that you were surprised. While it is
interesting to hear Mark's version of the events, it was widely known
that this was Yahoo's strategy at the time. As a result this is all
mostly just of historical interest.
Not only was this strategy no secret (actually I thought it
was essentially obvious) it was widely known and discussed at the
time. In fact, I specifically remember discussing this with several
people at Live365 the day the deal was announced.
I'm not trying to excuse the CARP mess, defend the RIAA, or
argue that the process as implemented set an equitable rate. Frankly,
I believe that this outcome spells the death of independent webcasting,
which IMO was likely the result the RIAA desired anyway...
This e-mail from Mark does (once again) confirm that Mark was
the smartest business man in webcasting...
Sincerely yours, Peter Rothman
"More
will be leaving too..."
I am really upset about this deal Yahoo made. I am really upset
that my favorite Internet radio stations are gone -- Perkigoth is
gone -- and more will be leaving too. Yahoo sucks.
Ana K.
"ANTITRUST..."
One word comes to mind, "ANTITRUST". Come on people,
Microsoft is in court over a situation much less severe than this.
Dave
"Mr.
Cuban's e-mail was a little too late..."
I think Mr. Cuban's e-mail was a little too late. This should
have been brought to everyone's attention months ago. This upsets
me even more over this whole pathetic situation.
Joel Platfoot
ScreaminMP3.com
Here's more general feedback on the Librarian's decision last Thursday...
"DMCA
is a law that is flawed on its face..."
I was appalled what I heard that the RIAA and their lobbyists
conspired to secretly pass through Congress the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act back in 1998 during the Clinton administration, a law
passed without the knowledge and consent of the American people. In
fact, if my memory serves me correct, there was virtually
no media coverage when this bill was first introduced back in 1998,
since there was no such thing as webcasting back then.
The technology has evolved to a point where a listener with
a 56K dial-up connection can listen to streamed music with a mono
sound quality and frequent buffering problems. Streamcasting technology
still has a ways to go before it will be accepted on a practical basis.
Meanwhile, webcasters are having a difficult time finding advertisers
and sponsors to their sites. And a majority of them are not earning
very much income to speak of; they can barely earn enough to meet
their operating costs.
The record industry already has a near lock on a majority of
radio stations in operation. Now, they want to seize control of the
infant webcasting industry? In other words, charge any independent
webcaster exorbitant fees to push them out of business so that the
record industry with the RIAA's blessing can have Internet streamcasting
for themselves, AND charge listeners a fee to listen to their music!
What next? Charge people who listen to regular AM or FM radio a fee
to listen to music and endless commercials?
The DMCA is a law that is flawed on its face, and must be amended.
The notion that broadcasting music on regular radio is promotional
and streamcasting music on the Internet is not is preposterous! I
believe that Internet sites currently not making any money should
be exempt from fees until they begin turning a profit.
In the meantime, I hope the webcasters and their attorneys
will challenge the DMCA in court, and pressure Congress to fix the
problem.
Sincerely, Jim Kucharski
"Get
nasty with a class action lawsuit..."
This is terrible news for webcasting and for private enterprise
in the USA. The Library of Congress lowering of the CARP
ruling is little more than throwing a bone to the independent webcasters
who are in turn "getting boned" by the DMCA. We are the
ones who have spent years building the Internet radio medium and now
we are being told to get lost?
Before we all go bankrupt, it seems to me that a class action
lawsuit by all independent webcasters against the RIAA and the 5 major
labels is our only hope. I call on Live365 and other medium size webcasters
to lead the way by initiating the class action lawsuit. We've respected
the RIAA and given the corporate labels a chance to play fair. They've
proven that all they care about is creating another FM radio monopoly
on the Internet at our expense. This is not free enterprise in America
-- this is corporate tyranny.
It's time to get nasty with a class action lawsuit.
Shelby LaPre
RADIOPOWER.ORG
"The
artists involved can only benefit..."
Firstly as a resident of Australia, I used to listen to Internet
radio quite often, especially WLUP in Chicago, where I see you are
based. I think it is wrong that the RIAA want all these royalties
paid in excess of the normal radio licenses, because, as far as I
can see, the artists involved can only benefit from further airplay
(or web streaming), as it gets their product to far more people.
In Australia, we are very limited in what we can hear on the
radio, so for me to hear stuff on the Internet, it greatly expands
my listening experience...
Anyway, I would just like to add that I hope things can be
sorted out very soon, and live feeds from radio stations can return
to the Internet.
I also like listening to the radio advertisements, they give
an interesting insight to life in other parts of the world.