 |
 |
Looks like the net radio people and nameless hoards of "listeners" might have their day for now: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/business/14music.html Obvious to me: there's money to be made all around and this whole fight is kind of like dancing on the Titanic deck given the state of the music business. Also obvious to me: the "demand" that net broadcasters "limit listeners' abilities to store the files on their computers" is an impossible and dumb request. A smart negotiator doesn't inflame a negotiation by asking for something he knows well the other party cannot ever, under any circumstances, deliver. -- Tom Fine ----- Original Message ----- From: "phillip holmes" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 1:44 AM Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Urgent Message From SaveNetRadio > I, for one, purchase music I hear on internet radio. None of the stuff I find interesting is from > a major label. I wouldn't hear it on a Clear Channel station. This whole thing could do a big > disservice to independent labels and artists if it serves to scare people out of broadcasting. > Let's face it: over the air radio is a wasteland of crap. They don't play interesting music. > They don't play music from independent labels. They have horrible sound. They're squeezing the > signal to fit in "HD channels".......HD? That supposedly means High Definition. What it really > means is horrible doo-doo. The only place to find decent new music is on the internet or at a > good record shop. > Phillip > > Tom Fine wrote: >> Not as obvious to me: what percent of royalties paid go to the original artists and what percent >> go to Big Music companies? Just to be clear, I think a copyright owner should be paid for their >> copyright, but I'm curious because for an artist, there is probably a very big bite-back factor >> here in that if playing their music is priced out of the market, they lose vital exposure and >> marketing and I don't see any BM companies in a financially healthy position (by their own >> accouts) to step up and take on the burden of paying for exposure and marketing. >> >> -- Tom Fine >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "seva" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: <[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 1:46 PM >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Urgent Message From SaveNetRadio >> >> >>> obvious to me: i don't hear artists complaining one bit about getting more royalties. >>> >>> also obvious: to hear complaints only from the net radio people, who are --understandably-- >>> worried about fiscal situations, whether legally compliant or not. >>> >> >