LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  July 2007

ARSCLIST July 2007

Subject:

Re: Internet Radio Status Update

From:

Dismuke <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:07:11 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (94 lines)

--- Bob Olhsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From Dismuke: "... now that Congress has stepped
> into the
> picture, SoundExchange is under pressure to
> negotiate
> honestly and in good faith - something that it has
> not
> done to date..."
>
> Sorry, I've got to call BS on this statement. This
> is opinion and not fact.
>

Well, it is a matter of fact and record that, in order
to get Congress off its back, SoundExchange make a
production of sending out a press release a few weeks
ago announcing that it was willing to agree to cap the
$500 per channel "administration fee" which would have
forced players such as Live 365 with 10,000 channels
to fork over $5 million just to be allowed to stay in
business ON TOP of any of the outrageously insane
royalties. at 5 channels or $2,500 per service.

Well, what SoundExchange did not reveal in its press
release or to Congress was the fine print. Such an
offer was good only through 2008. After that,
webcasters would once again have been on the hook for
an amount between them of over $1 billion - more money
than they would be paying in royalties.

OBVIOUSLY no webcaster this side of an INSANE ASSYLUM
is going to sign off on an agreement which would
accomplish NOTHING other than pushing the date of
their forced demise back two years - this time with
the webcasters own sanction and signature.

The weasles at SoundExchange are not stupid. They
knew that webcasters would never agree to such terms.
But that didn't matter and they announced their offer
to the public and Congress conveniently forgetting to
mention the fine print. They did it because they
wanted to get Congress and the public off their back.
They did it not in order to BECOME reasonable people
but, rather to APPEAR to be reasonable people in the
eyes of Congress and the general public.

THAT is what I mean by not negotiating honestly and in
good faith. And it is a matter of fact and public
record - NOT opinion.

As for webcasters not "negotiating" - well, here is a
principle that might perhaps be new and very radical
to you, Bob: THE TERMS OF ONE'S OWN MURDER IS **NOT**
A MATTER THAT IS OPEN TO NEGOTIATION.

"Murder" by the way is an accurate word as that is
exactly what RIAA/SoundExchange wishes to do to the
webcasting industry so that it can replace it with its
own version of Internet radio which would be a carbon
copy of the FM formats and playlists. They are
terrified that their status as "gatekeeper" to
all-important airplay will go away and now be in the
hands of thousands and thousands of webcasters whose
only standard for selection is their passion for the
music. If the RIAA labels lose their gatekeeper role
over who does and does not get airplay - well, the
artists will no longer have anything to do with the
RIAA labels. They will get much more money and more
control over their artistic product by going it alone
and retaining the ownership of their own music. The
major record labels are nothing more than middlemen
between the artists and consumers of recorded music -
and they take a HUGE cut out of the transaction giving
the artists but a pittance. In the past there was a
valid need for such middlemen as they served a purpose
that the artists were unable to do on their own.
Today, there is no longer a need for them as the
aritsts can either do it all on their own or, if they
cannot, they can outsource the tasks to people that
work on THEIR terms and not the other way around. And
rather than the obsolete middlemen taking such a huge
chunk out of the transaction, in the world of the
future the money will go to customers in the form of
lower prices and artists who will be entitled to 100%
of the profits.

Again, the subject of artifically propping up old
business models and discussions of the specific
process by which webcasters are being asked to
participate in their own demise is NOT a subject open
to negotiation.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager