BY PAUL MALONEY
Independent record label Artemis
Records, home to artists like Graham Nash, Warren Zevon,
the Josh Joplin Group, Rickie Lee Jones, and Steve Earle,
has announced it will waive webcasting royalty fees for their music
for one year.
The waiver contract is available for viewing and downloading
from the label's website here.
"In allowing free use of our catalog at this early stage
we hope to stimulate the
Internet radio format," said Artemis Chairman and CEO Danny
Goldberg (pictured at left) in a press release. Goldberg
called the waiver for webcasting "an incredibly worthy marketing
and promotional tool."
Goldberg told Reuters (here),
"We're a small company with a lot of music that
doesn't get played on commercial radio. I appreciate the Webcaster.
In terms of the future, the diversity they offer is valuable to
a label like ours. I wanted to make a gesture of support."
Goldberg is the former Chairman and CEO of Mercury Records,
Warner Brothers Records, and former President of Atlantic Records.
Artemis artists also include Marah, Boston, Jay Farrar, Mississippi
North All Stars, and
the Reverend Horton Heat.
Artemis is not a member of the Recording Industry Association
of America (RIAA), the
industry organization representing the major labels and dozens of
independents that has been at the forefront of the struggle with
webcasters over royalty fees.
However, according to Reuters, the RIAA has no objection
to Artemis' decision. A spokesman said, "From the beginning, we
have always argued that the copyright holder should have control
over how their music is used."
...
... I think Mr. Goldberg is making a smart
move, though maybe not such a great one for webcasters.
He ends up looking like the good guy, doesn't give too much
away (actually, he doesn't permanently give up anything),
and he and his artists just may end up reaping the benefits
of strong support on Internet radio (I would imagine some
Net radio programmers are taking a good look at the Artemis
roster right now).
While most webcasters we've heard from seem to embrace
the Artemis move, others are stressing some caution in regards
to the terms of the waiver contract (as there should be for
any contract), and we
would agree.
For instance, webcasters should note that the one-year
waiver period begins August 1 2002. In other words, this contract
would not relieve Internet radio of its "retroactive"
obligations to the record company.
Here's more. This is directly from the contract:
"8.Company
shall maintain a comprehensive
database of all public performances of the Masters
transmitted hereunder and all ephemeral
recordings of the Masters created hereunder.
Such information, along with aggregate
information regarding users of the Site, shall
be provided to Artemis upon request (but in no event more
than one time per week). The parties acknowledge that all
such information is the joint
property of the parties hereto."
So, Artemis expects: (1)
"census reporting"
(as opposed to "sampling") for recordkeeping, if
we're to take the word "comprehensive" literally;
(2) a record of ephemeral recordings,
a request of record labels that the Librarian of Congress
seems to have pretty strongly rejected; (3) user
information, which even the RIAA has dropped as
a demand; and (4) joint ownership of the valuable
database of listener habits you build with your
business.
This is probably a good business move for Artemis,
but it seems as if webcasters perhaps should beware. (On the
other hand, this may merely be an example of a legal department
getting carried away with their work and going beyond the
wishes of their client).
Please feel free to
use the "Feedback" form below to share your thoughts
and comments. -- PM ...
From CNet News.com: "The Recording Industry Association
of America's Web site was unreachable over the weekend due
to a denial-of-service attack.
"The apparently deliberate overload rendered the RIAA.org
site unavailable for portions of four days and came after the group
endorsed legislation to allow copyright holders to disrupt peer-to-peer
networks.
"The malicious flood started on Friday and did not involve
any intrusion into the RIAA's internal network, a representative
for the trade association said on Monday afternoon. Nobody has claimed
credit for the denial-of-service attack, which ended at 2 a.m. PDT
on Monday.
"'Don't they have something better to do during the summer
than hack our site?' asked the RIAA representative, who asked not
to be identified. 'Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from
stealing music.'..
"On Thursday, the RIAA endorsed a bill written by Rep.
Howard Berman, D-Calif., that would authorize copyright
holders to begin 'blocking, diverting or otherwise impairing' peer-to-peer
networks."
Read this entire article by Declan McCullagh at CNet here.
RAIN's coverage of the Berman bill is here.
On Friday, while looking for official public comment from
the record industry on the Inslee bill (see RAINhere),
we were unable to connect to both the RIAA and SoundExchange sites.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
"The
product has been paid for. Period..."
Can't an analogy be made here? Correct me if my logic is flawed:
I purchase a bus. I then use it for commercial purposes, delivering
people to various destinations. Do the new owners of this
bus pay 'royalties' on the ticket sales to the manufacturer of the
bus? Change the words 'bus' to 'car' and now you have a taxi. Is the
taxicab company paying royalties to the auto manufacturer for all
the extra money they make in taxi fares? I don't think that's the
case (correct me if I'm wrong).
So music production is the same. Just as there are automobile
and truck/bus 'creators' (designers) and 'producers' (manufacturing),
so is it with music. Same process; different product.
Once the record is paid for (which I always did -- nothing
obtained from Napster and the such), the product has been paid for.
Period. Imagine Honda charging car owners every time someone saw them
driving a Honda! Better yet, charged them every time they talked great
about the car they bought!?!?
Mike Cross
MYNDFK
This is feedback to the SoundExchange response to the Inslee bill
(see RAINhere)...
"I'd
like to see him say that to artists..."
SoundExchange's John Simson: "When will recording artists
and those who invest their time, energy and considerable resources
to create one of our country's greatest legacies -- sound recordings
-- be allowed to receive fair compensation for their creations?"
Ha ha! I'd like to see him say that to artists that had been
swept under the rug by the record labels until Internet radio reintroduced
those "forgotten" or unknown artists to a worldwide audience
for free.
Arek
FutureAssassin.com
"It
will be far more than $500..."
Apparently Hilary Rosen just doesn't get it and/or has complete
and utter tunnel vision. The quotes in the article suggest that college
stations are basically nothing and only a handful of people listen
to it
at any given time. She apparently misses or ignores the facts that
most college stations aren't some cheapened tiny 50-watt studio deal
with wannabe-jock kids running circa 1960 radio equipment.
Furthermore, she claims that you must have a "business model."
Last I checked, small nonprofit organizations don't have an elaborate
business model as a regular company or business would because they're
not in it to make money off of this, especially since most are run
by students, not businessmen.
With student fees and the like covering their budgets, usually
ends meet OK. However, granted, $500 isn't a lot at all and I'm positive
many stations, to continue streaming, would be happy to pay such.
The problem is that we're all complaining because it
will be far more than $500 to stream.
To run $500 a year based on the estimated figures of the original
nonprofit/non-CPB stations ($0.0002 per song, 15 songs an hour, 24
hours a day, 365 days a year), there can be no more then an average
of 19 listeners at any given time. (At the old $0.0007?
Just over 5.)
I believe college radio stations have far more people then
that tuning in and listening. I know ours is (or rather was) around
150-200. Do the math. That's a bit more then $500.
Matt Feato
WMUA-FM
UMass-Amherst
... 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.