 |
 |
--- Bob Olhsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Not at all, you are missing the point. Anybody can > negotiate a totally appropriate deal with > SoundExchange. I don't believe that is true. If I am not mistaken, I believe that any sort of negotiation with SoundExchange has to be cleared through either the CRB judges or ratified with Congress. SoundExchange does NOT set the rates. The CRB does (though, it, in fact, handed down more or less exactly what SoundExchange had asked for). Now, I do recall reading something a while back that suggested that SoundExchange MIGHT be able to negotiate on behalf of those copyright holders that are MEMBERS of SoundExchange. But not all of the copyright holders SoundExchange collects royalties for are SoundExchange members. SoundExchange collects royalties on ALL performances of copyrighted sound recordings even if a given copyright holder HATES SoundExchange and wants nothing to do with it. My understanding is that the only way to stop SoundExchange from collecting the royalty for a copyright holder if each and every broadcaster playing that copyright holder's work has a specific direct licensing agreement. I am about 99.95% sure that SoundExchange does NOT have the authority to negotiate on behalf of copyright holders who are NOT members UNLESS it is cleared by the CRB or Congress. But even if I am wrong on this - my point still stands. SoundExchange is controlled by and clearly acts in the interests of the RIAA - and yet you are suggesting that it is totally ok that it be in a position to negotiate the rates webcasters must pay to use the recordings of the RIAA's COMPETITION? You are telling me that you don't see a problem with that? I am afraid that is no different than being forced to negotiate the prices you will pay for groceries at the little family owned supermarket at the end of your street through some puppet organization controlled by Wal-mart, Kroger and Safeway. Obviously, the outcome of such a negotiation is not going to be in either your favor or the favor of the family owned supermarket. > > Yes, SoundExcahnge theoretically could force all > webcasters to pay the statuatory rate but why on > Earth would they want to do something that stupid? > Well..... uhhmmmm.... how about to prevent independent labels and artists from being brought to the public's attention through Internet airplay? How about depriving artists access to a rapidly growing medium where the RIAA labels do NOT serve as gatekeepers and a medium that might very well someday put the artists in a position to go into direct competition with the labels themselves? Let's see....SoundExchange was founded by the RIAA and was once an RIAA division. Most of its board members are either RIAA types, representatives of major labels, the musicians union and others who were hand picked based on loyalty to the RIAA labels. Most of the top people who work at SoundExchange, including its President, are former RIAA people. One of the SoundExchange negotiators is an RIAA lawyer. When negotiations come up on matters that have positive implications for RIAA competitors and negative implications for the RIAA labels - well, exactly where do you think the sympathies and loyalties of SoundExchange are going to be? I am afraid, Bob, that your posting has just made my case far more eloquently than even I have! Congratulations!