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:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  July 2007

ARSCLIST July 2007

Subject:

Re: Urgent Message From SaveNetRadio

From:

Bob Olhsson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:59:29 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (99 lines)

Here's part of the story:


-- NEWS RELEASE --
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: RICHARD ADES OR
GREGG PERRY
APRIL 30, 2007 202-640-5894
[log in to unmask]
Royalty Statistics Disprove “Sky Is Falling”
Claims of CRB Critics
Facts Show Webcasters Dominated by 10 Large Companies; Small
Webcasters Used as Smokescreen to Promote Rate Rollback
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A review of royalty payment statistics shows that the
webcasting music business is dominated by 10 large, highly-profitable companies.
The review of 2006 royalty payments conducted by SoundExchange demonstrates that,
through Savenetradio, the big webcasters are painting a highly distorted picture in an
effort to maintain extremely low rates and high profit margins.
These facts are contrary to alarmist claims by opponents of the Copyright Royalty Board
(CRB) who say that rates are too high. Further, the review shows that webcasting is
growing dramatically.
“Now that Savenetradio’s Jake Ward has publicly admitted that Savenetradio is a front
for large webcasters and was launched by the Digital Music Association (DiMA), the
organization that represents mega-corporate interests like Yahoo! and AOL, the veil has
been lifted and the real beneficiaries of recently introduced legislation have been
confirmed,” said John Simson, Executive Director of SoundExchange.
Opponents of the CRB rate decision paint a picture of a webcaster industry made of
small, largely non-commercial webcasters who will be forced out of business by the new
CRB royalty rates even going so far as to say the music will "die." While webcasters say
they support the interests of performing artists, an objective analysis convincingly
demonstrates that their claims are highly distorted.
“There’s no question that these statistics show that critics of the CRB decision are
playing a game of ‘Chicken Little,’” said Barrie Kessler, SoundExchange’s Chief
Operating Officer who conducted the analysis. “They are definitely claiming ‘the sky is
falling’ but the facts show absolutely that it’s blue skies ahead for webcasters, artists and
labels.”
The review of 2006 webcasting royalties paid SoundExchange shows that 82 percent of
royalties were paid by the 10 largest webcasters, which make up 4 percent of all paying
services. In contrast, small webcasters paid less than 2 percent of all royalties paid
SoundExchange.
“Not only is Internet radio not going to die,” said Simson, “it’s going to continue to
flourish. The statistics show it is a vigorous business dominated by large businesses that
can easily pay fair market rates while also having room for small webcasters and niche
services. In fact, these same large services stream in the United Kingdom and Europe
where current rates are nearly identical to the rate set by the CRB for 2007.”
Under a bill introduced by Reps. Jay Inslee (D-WA) and Don Manzullo (R-IL), large
commercial services like Clear Channel and Microsoft would experience a windfall in
excess of $10 million a year that otherwise would be paid to artists and labels.
Under a statutory license, webcasting services, large and small, have been given the
opportunity to play millions of sound recordings released in the United States without
seeking permission from anyone – not the performer, not the copyright owner, not the
composer. “Unfortunately, viable, financially-profitable webcasters seem to feel they
should be able to play music, making a healthy profit, without fairly compensating
performers or record labels. That’s just plain wrong,” said Simson.
Add to that the fact that webcasting is growing dramatically and it becomes
unconscionable that these huge businesses are not willing to pay artists and labels their
fare share for the product that is the engine behind their businesses.
During all of 1998, Arbitron reported that only 6 percent of all Americans listened to
Internet radio. In January, 2007 alone, Arbitron reported that 20 percent of Americans 12
years and older listened to online radio, a total of 49 million Americans.
In fact, in a blatant attempt to derail the growing movement to secure fair royalty
payments for performers in all types of media, the National Association of Broadcasters
recently added to the disinformation campaign with the absurd characterization of
webcasting as “a fledgling audio platform.”
“It just goes to show that big corporate webcasters will go to any length to protect their
outsized profits and unfairly low artists’ payments,” said Simson. Using misinformation
and blatantly false statistics, they are trying to recruit small webcasters and even some
artists to front for them, but their secret is out.”
Since 2004 there has been a major jump in paying services – growing from 430 distinct
webcasting services registered and paying royalties in 2004 to 989 in 2006,
demonstrating a huge jump in listeners and exposure for these businesses.
FACT SHEET
• Webcaster royalty rates have essentially remained flat since 1998.
• Despite webcaster claims to the contrary, the CRB’s decision reflects a modest
increase over time.
􀂾 For 2006, the increase is only a 5 percent increase over the earlier rate.
􀂾 The rate for 2010 reflects only an 8 percent annualized increase in rates
since 1998.
• The CRB set a “per stream” rate for 2007 at $0.0011. Thus, a consumer who
listens 40 hours a month to one channel playing 15 songs an hour will cost the
webcaster 66 cents a month in royalties – a sum far less than what some
webcasters charge listeners for subscriptions or can recoup through other means
such as advertising or merchandising.
In an analysis published in Royalty Week, Ben Newhouse, working from a recent
Bridge Ratings report showing Internet radio users average 473.2 hours of music per
year, and that based on 2006 rates, the “royalty bill for a webcaster is $6.49 per
listener per year.”
• This most certainly is not a matter of big hit artists and major record companies
getting rich off the backs of small business webcasters.
􀂾 Two-thirds of total royalties collected by SoundExchange go to artists and
independent labels.
􀂾 The average each artist earned from webcasting royalties in 2006 was
$360.
# # #

Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com

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

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