From Rep. Inslee's press release: "Disappointed in
the Librarian of Congress' recent imposition of high fees on web
radio
broadcasters and the resultant shutdown of many web radio broadcasts
(including KIRO and KMTT in Seattle), U.S. Reps.
Jay Inslee [right] (D-WA), George
Nethercutt [below] (R-WA), and Rick
Boucher (D-VA) introduced new legislation to change existing
web radio laws.
"The bill is designed to make the copyright royalty
arbitration process more fair for smaller
entities, and will go before the
House of Representatives' Judiciary and Small Business Committees...
"Said Nethercutt, 'No one wins under the current CARP standard
-- webcasters will close shop,
consumers lose access to a wide
selection of programming, and copyright holders collect
nothing...'
"Said Boucher, 'Unfortunately, both the CARP and the
Librarian of Congress were working under
a flawed law that has produced a royalty rate which harms
not only the hundreds of webcasters
that have already shut down operations, but also Internet
users seeking innovative music programming and artists
seeking alternative avenues through which to promote their music...'
"Some highlights of Inslee's, Nethercutt's, and Boucher's
Internet Radio Fairness Act
include:
(1) Small businesses (those that -- six million dollars
in gross revenue) will be exempted
from last week's decision by the Librarian of Congress's on fees
for web radio...
(2)All future CARPs must change the royalty rate
standard from the 'willing-buyer/willing-seller' to the 'traditional'
standard that was enacted by the 1976 Copyright Act...
(3)Small businesses will be exempted from the
payment requirement for participation
in future CARP proceedings...
(4) All future Carps must eliminate
fees for temporary recordings ('ephemeral
recordings')...
(5) All future CARPS must comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. This will require Carps to specifically
consider the impact of any decisions on small businesses."
Look for more, including RAIN Analysis, on this proposed
bill soon...
Thanks
to all the fine companies
who agreed to be part of our recent "RAINVendor Guide (Ver. 2.0)" issue. You
can see the entire Guide here.
To be part of RAIN's Vendor Guide, please call
312-527-3879. (Coming Monday: Automation systems)
Today's
featured category: Audio processing
eSTREAM
(Broadcast Electronics, Inc.)
eSTREAM processes your stations audio so you stream
On air audio quality on the net! through your
favorite streaming media server. Your cyber audience will
experience the powerful new dimension in Internet streamed
audio allowing you to increase revenue by building your
stations cyber audience.
SRSWOWcast
SRSWOWcast Technologies markets hardware and software
products incorporating patented and award-winning SRS
audio enhancement technology. SRS technology makes any
type of compressed audio sound better and allows content
providers to save money. Ask us how!
From CNet News.com: "Copyright owners would be able
to legally hack into peer-to-peer
networks, according to a bill
introduced in the House of Representatives on Thursday.
"The measure would dramatically rewrite federal law
to permit nearly unchecked electronic
disruptions if a copyright holder has a 'reasonable basis' to believe
that piracy is occurring.
"The bill, sponsored byReps.
Howard Berman [right], D-Calif., and Howard
Coble [left], R-N.C.,
would immunize groups such as
the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording
Industry Association of America (RIAA)
from all state and federal laws
if they disable, block or otherwise impair a 'publicly accessible
peer-to-peer file-trading network...'
"Because Congress only has about five work weeks left
before it is scheduled to adjourn for the year, the outlook for
the bill is uncertain.
"However, its sponsors includetop
Republican and Democratic committee chairmen so it's
likely to receive a
warm welcome in the House of Representatives at a hearing tentatively
scheduled for this fall. Coble is the chairman of the House subcommittee
on intellectual property, and Berman is the top Democrat
on the panel...
"The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such
as viruses, worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking,
would be permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should
not delete files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an
intrusion to sue if files are accidentally erased."
From Wired.com: "Legislation meant to thwart unauthorized
downloading on certain peer-to-peer networks will still
allow major media companies to offer file-trading through their
own systems...
"Along with making it open season on individual users,
open-source programs, and decentralized networks, the bill also
gives a free pass to chat applications
run by the very media companies
that would most benefit from open-source networks being shuttered.
"AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), MSN Messenger [right]and Yahoo Messenger -- which each have specific
file-trading options built into their systems that enable millions
of users to trade their share without fear of electronic attack
-- will continue to flourish. The recording industry and movie studios
have largely ignored those three
chat applications, which have financial ties to the major record
studios and movie studios, in their litigation and anti-piracy activities.
"'What this bill has said is that what is good enough for
the Internet isn't good enough for AOL,' said Fred von Lohmann,
an intellectual property lawyer with the Electronic
Frontier Foundation."
... The Internet radio industry may be looking at this bill
with some concern. What sort of implications might this new
power for copyright holders have in the webcasting field?
For instance, if SoundExchange believes a particular
webcaster isn't properly reporting its playlists for royalty
purposes -- is this a "reasonable" enough basis to
think there's a copyright violation? And if so, will they be
allowed to disrupt the webcaster's operation?
The bill does explicitly say "peer-to-peer"
and "piracy." It doesn't mention webcasting or other
copyright violations. But might giving the copyright owners
police permissions be a dangerous precedent? One that could
lead to new regulations violating the rights of webcasters?
And the point of the second article could be applied
here as well. If, like many webcasters suspect, the ultimate
aim of record labels is to price independent Internet radio
outlets out the market to own it themselves, they now would
have another powerful tool to do so, from which their own applications
may be immune. -- PM ...
From The Observer's John Naughton:
"Internet radio is a great illustration of why the unregulated
Internet stimulates so much
innovation and allows an unparalleled range of choice. Perhaps we
shouldn't be surprised that it's under threat.
"Way back in 1994, a chap namedRob
Glaser had a great idea for ferrying audio signals across
the Net...special 'player' software (available as a free download)
would, after a brief pause, start playing the audio even as the
rest of the file was downloading, thereby giving the listener the
illusion of being able to listen to audio programming live. Thus
was born 'streaming media'...
"One of the reasons Real Audio
took off was because it enabled anyone to set up a virtual radio
station. No longer did one need a broadcasting licence and a transmitter
and all the other expensive apparatus of broadcasting: all that
was required was a server, a broadband connection, some server software
(available at a modest price from Mr. Glaser) and a source of audio
material. It followed as the night the day therefore that Internet
radio stations mushroomed like flowers after a desert storm...
"What happened, in other words, was a stupendous extension
of consumer choice at a time when conventional radio
was becoming increasingly bland and standardised as a result of
corporate consolidation...
"Now, however, this glorious explosion of consumer
choice is under threat. The record companies persuaded the US Copyright
Office that Internet radio stations should pay more onerous royalties
than those imposed on conventional broadcast stations. The Office
ruled that Webcasters should not only pay a royalty to songwriters,
but also to the record companies, and added the crippling requirement
that the Webcasting royalty should be levied on a per listener
basis...
"It's just another case of how the owners of intellectual
property are trying to choke off the future."
A new company called YES Networks
has launched their interactive song identification and retail tool
for broadcast radio. The company this week announced that over 1000
US
radio stations are taking part in the service.
One of the developers of the product, ConneXus Corporation,
in 1999 introduced the "*CD" system (see details in RAINhere),
upon which YES is based. The tool allows listeners to identify the
songs they hear on broadcast radio, and easily buy the relevant
CD, concert tickets, or find live online auctions related to the
artist. The system covers over 1000 music stations in over 150 US
markets, and can track music back 24 hours.
The service is can be customized and added to a particular
radio station's website, and is accessible to wireless users through
a "WAP" interface. There is no fee for radio stations
to include the YES service on their sites. Stations then get a cut
of the revenue generated by music, merchandise, and ticket sales
through their site.
"Limits
the marketability of lesser-
known artists..."
To be quite honest, I don't see much of a difference from the
record industry and the frivolous law suits of people who think that
$10 Million is the only way to compensate them for the fact that they
spilled coffee in their own lap!
The fact that they feel that they MUST be compensated at every
corner and in every market limits the marketability of the smaller,
less known artists! In other words, the rich get richer and the poor
get poorer.
Kudos Corporate America, you have lived up to your stereotype....
you make me sick.
Travis
"When
does this stop?.."
I'm Mike from AUSTRIA and I enjoyed hearing Madison's MAGIC98
its my favorite radio station because of their music variety and now
its gone from the Internet !!!!!!
When does this really stop, to stop every good radio station
??? I can not get American regional radio station. Internet is the
only way to do it on another continent !!!!!!
Greetings,
Mike
"I
think the fight has only just begun..."
Like many, Internet radio has opened up an entire new universe
of music for me I would have otherwise never discovered. Subsequently,
I have purchased many CDs from big and small labels alike.
It's a sad world when creativity and the free dissemination
of ideas are purposely halted, but I guess that's the way it has always
been. The rich and powerful will always want to maintain their power
base.
But, I'm an eternal optimist......It seems that the major labels
and broadcasters are running scared. (This is a good thing.) One thing
is true, when factoring in the Internet, there are too many variables
to count. Coupled with the fact that the Internet is still very young,
I think the fight has only just begun.
Looking forward to the next thorn in big music's side........I
will be one of the ones helping to put it there ;-) .........
CJP
... Here is a growing list of webcasters
who, because they don't feel they can manage webcasting royalties
in a viable business, have decided that it's in their best interests
to silence their streams. (We thank them for their hard work
and dedication to their audiences and the industry, and wish
them luck in their future endeavors...)
Have
we missed others? Use the feedback form above or e-mail
us here.
Public stations
now off line
This is from the SOS:
Save Our Streams website, which focuses the struggle
against thewebcasting royalty rates as they pertain to independent
educational and noncommercial stations.