Save Internet Radio.

[Fedz]

The SaveNetRadio Coalition

The future of Internet radio is in immediate danger.

Royalty rates for webcasters have been drastically increased by a recent ruling and are due to go into effect on July 15 (retroactive to Jan 1, 2006!).

If the increased rates remain unchanged, the majority of webcasters will go bankrupt and silent on this date. Internet radio needs your help! H.R. 2060, The Internet Radio Equality Act was introduced by Representatives Jay Inslee (D-WA) and Donald Manzullo (R-IL ) to save the Internet radio industry.

Please call your congressperson to ask them to co-sponsor H.R. 2060 by clicking below.

Please Act Now

[enVias]

I urge everyone to help out with this, I work for DI.fm (specifically on the hardcore channel aka happyhardcore.com) and this is quite worrying. Thanks for bringing it to the attention of this forum, Fedz

[Serra]

Honestly, with the amount of content available, radio channels, XM/Sirius, DirectTV, Local cable, traditional radio streaming (OTA radio that is streamed) and the use of recorded material, such as Ipods, I can't see that this is a big deal. Do we really need a ton of online radio when we have SO many other outlets?

It will result in many streaming radio stations not being able to operate, as I guess $500 a year is difficult for some radio people to come up with, but overall, there will still be plenty of choice. This should have no effect on commercial radio stations, like AOL or Yahoo, they can afford to pay.

Also, keep in mind that this only really effects music radio, not talk, which is likely far more important than music radio anyway, from an impact/political/First Amendment view point.

At first glance, one might be tempted to jump in and "save" Internet radio, but I can't see this as being an issue that I even care about. The types of Internet radio I would listen to are not effected and music, I can get any place.

[kmaw]

Originally Posted by Serra

At first glance, one might be tempted to jump in and "save" Internet radio, but I can't see this as being an issue that I even care about. The types of Internet radio I would listen to are not effected and music, I can get any place.

Even when you look like you're being bitter... you always provide reasons and justify your responses.

[phatchopolis]

I think the problem is they expect a small and sometimes free operation to be able to pay what bigger companies will. I think I read something awhile back about a California radio station may discontinue their internet radio once this goes into effect. Their online station is used to feature emerging and unknown artists. That's where this will effect people. Not everybody likes to listen to what's available on mainstream outlets and sometimes these stations are a way of finding an outlet for what they like or to help upcoming artists get exposure where they may not before. Just another illustration of the music industries greed. I'm sure the RIAA is in here somewhere.

[phatchopolis]

A few snippets from this article.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18384667/site/newsweek/

The fee hike will only affect Internet radio, not terrestrial AM and FM, because of a strange wrinkle in copyright law: broadcast stations pay royalties only for the composition as a piece of intellectual property—these are the fees that go to songwriters through ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. But in 1995 the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) lobbied Congress to pass a law that would require an additional performance fee specifically on digital music. So Internet radio stations pay both the composition fee plus an additional royalty for the performance of the song—the actual act of streaming it online. This fee goes to record companies and artists through SoundExchange, an independent body set up by the RIAA to collect and distribute digital royalties. This is the fee that the Royalty Board has proposed raising. That there is a different fee structure for Internet and terrestrial radio strikes both Webcasters and SoundExchange boardmembers as inherently unfair—though for different reasons. Webcasters don’t want to have to pay more than their FM counterparts, while SoundExchange executive director Jon Simson would like to see terrestrial radio start paying the additional royalty. "The discrepancy doesn’t make sense," he says. "Terrestrial broadcasters should be paying performers."

But Ian Rogers of Yahoo! Music (the Internet radio leader with 23 percent of the market’s listeners, according to Hitwise), says that "SoundExchange is just not dealing with the facts. Internet radio in its entirety is less than a $50 million industry. The amount of money I can make selling ads on my radio product is less than I will pay in royalties." Ironically, it's the smaller online DJs who really get stuck with a bill they can’t pay under a per-song, per-listener fee. The small Webcasters play lots of songs but don’t bring in as much advertising revenue as the corporate streamers—if they bring in any money at all. Rusty Hodge of Soma FM says he paid $20,000 in royalties under the old rate last year. With the Royalty Board’s decision, Hodge estimates his fees for 2007 will be $600,000 and closer to $1 million next year.

Nonprofit stations like National Public Radio affiliates pay a flat fee up until a certain number of listeners is reached, after which they have to pay the commercial rate—meaning some public radio stations may see their fees spike 10-fold. "There are some stations considering pulling the plug entirely," says NPR spokesperson Andi Sporkin. "We're the ‘No Justin Timberlake Zone.’ You're getting all these genres that aren't getting regular commercial airplay and though this decision certainly hurts the stations, it hurts listeners more."

But what about the musicians? David Byrne, the former Talking Heads frontman, offers a unique perspective as both a big-time artist and as a small-time host of his own not-for-profit online radio station. He says his station costs him about $2,000 a month in fees and estimates that once the Royalty Board decision goes into effect, his costs will jump 20 percent the first year. "I lose money on this," he tells NEWSWEEK. He also dismisses the notion that he’s giving away tunes to the detriment of performers—an argument advanced by SoundExchange and the Recording Artists' Coalition, a lobby group founded by Don Henley and Sheryl Crow. "My experience was that, yes, when a song is played a lot on the radio it generates some royalties. But what it really generates is that people know your work." Which, says Byrne, translates into album sales.

[Fedz]

Originally Posted by Serra

Honestly, with the amount of content available, radio channels, XM/Sirius, DirectTV, Local cable, traditional radio streaming (OTA radio that is streamed) and the use of recorded material, such as Ipods, I can't see that this is a big deal. Do we really need a ton of online radio when we have SO many other outlets?

To many, many thousands of listeners (Inc. myself) Internet radio is a main online activity.
Internet radio has more diversity of countries music and genres than any traditional radio.

I enjoy listening to gospel radio (via shoutacst) this isn't available on my traditional radio and I also listen to radio from many US states and Italy.

I'd say yes Internet radio has huge following of listeners.

Originally Posted by Serra

It will result in many streaming radio stations not being able to operate, as I guess $500 a year is difficult for some radio people to come up with, but overall, there will still be plenty of choice. This should have no effect on commercial radio stations, like AOL or Yahoo, they can afford to pay.

$500 is small compared to the hike whats going through.
Y! and AOL may be able to afford to pay but then your left with less choice and are at the mercy of these big players having a channel you want and at their discretion.

Originally Posted by Serra

At first glance, one might be tempted to jump in and "save" Internet radio, but I can't see this as being an issue that I even care about. The types of Internet radio I would listen to are not effected and music, I can get any place.

As you don't care for Internet radio this probably explains why you have no concern, 'bury your head in the sand', 'look the other way' attitude about Internet radio but, this doesn't justify the possible slaughter of Internet radio.

[mv808]

Move the station out of the US......