Internet Radio Will Go Silent on June 26th

[Joor]

Lawbean » Blog Archive » Internet Radio to Fall Silent in Protest on June 26th
"Thousands of U.S. webcasters plan to turn off the music and go silent this Tuesday, June 26th, to draw attention to an impending royalty rate increase that, if implemented, would lead to the virtual shutdown of this country's Internet radio industry. In March, the Copyright Royalty Board announced that it would raise royalties for Internet broadcasters, moving them from a per-song rate to a per-listener rate. The increase would be made retroactive to the beginning of 2006 and would double over the next five years. Internet radio sites would be charged per performance of a song. A "performance" is defined as the streaming of one song to one listener; thus a station that has an average audience of 500 listeners racks up 500 "performances" for each song it plays."

When is this shit with Lawyers and legal system going to end?

 

[Bugz]

When greed goes.

(never )

 

[Overdriven]

Suppose I can see why they're doing it, but they'll all get totally pissed after a while as they (I think) like providing the service.. Granted, the whole royalty thing is a bit insane.. But, what can we do?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well, if those are the rules applied to regular radio, then it's just and right.

Why should this form of pirate radio be allowed to have a different set of rules only because it's in a more generalised and public forum?

 

[Raven]

my careface is down the back of the sofa...soz

 

[Ezteq]

im at work that day...

seriously though everything comes back to money doesnt it, it would be impossible for any civilisation like ours to have something that is free and that people enjoy and can contribute to or whatever just for the fun of it without someone trying to make money from it.

i think if that happened there would be a series of beaurocratic head explosions lol

 

[Chronictank]

Well, if those are the rules applied to regular radio, then it's just and right.

Why should this form of pirate radio be allowed to have a different set of rules only because it's in a more generalised and public forum?

regular radio needs to be controlled as there is only a finite space available for it, hence you need to "rent" your space at a high cost.
Internet has a potentially infinite amount of space, therefore it cant be classified as the same thing (ignoring the fact that the space is effectively being rented as you pay for your connection).
So no it is not right for the station to be charged for its existance, as it would be for normal radio

HOWEVER if they don't have permission from the record label/artist to play the music it is effectively piracy and i agree should be regulated.

Back on topic, as the above is nothing to do with the quote , they are charging royalites to per-user not per-song (as it is atm), which is not like normal radio. It is plain greed tbh

 

[Bahumat]

nothing will change imo, they'll all turn their radio's off and then switch them back on the same day, or the day later. If they switched it off for a month then they'd notice people, but one day is nothing.

 

[old.Tohtori]

On the topic of not charging the same for internet radio simply because there's more room on the internet, is not a just cause for not charging.

In my opinion, be it a tv, radio, internet(especially since internet popularity is through the roof compared to radio), should be the same. SImply because the media changes, doesn't mean that the costs should.

Now on to the subject that is actually discussed in content...

Back on topic, as the above is nothing to do with the quote , they are charging royalites to per-user not per-song (as it is atm), which is not like normal radio. It is plain greed tbh

This would be wrong. If they are going to charge by customers listening, this should apply to radio aswell.

If not, the aformentioned "same rules for all" should apply.

 

[Succi]

just evolution really.

Internet fucks over cd sales, record companies fuck over internet radio. Lets face it, theyre gonna recover their losses any way possible.

 

[Chronictank]

On the topic of not charging the same for internet radio simply because there's more room on the internet, is not a just cause for not charging.

I didnt say that, i said there is more room so there should be lower costs
You are charged for the internet, thus you are charged for internet radio as in essence you are paying for your "space"
i.e.your IP (static usually), exactly same as a radio frequency. In fact you pay additionally for data usage (bandwidth) which is something that doesnt exist on the radio.

Any additional charges over your internet connection are bulls*** as there is no such thing when it comes to radio broadcasting.

In my opinion, be it a tv, radio, internet(especially since internet popularity is through the roof compared to radio), should be the same. SImply because the media changes, doesn't mean that the costs should.

It already is, if you mean you want a regulated cost across the board it simply isnt realistic, one example was the radio i said previously.

 

[Lamp]

Do we need radio ? Its a popular medium at the mo, but will it still be so in 100 years time ? 200 years ? I see more & more ppl listeneing to ipods in cars now. If you want news / traffic updates, these can just be digitally beamed to your car and displayed on your standard built-in sat nav LCD windshield.

 

[Huntingtons]

yes, radio will be needed because its still a source of audio that brings news and interesting programs (just like tv) for people not being able to watch

 

[Lamp]

But do you think over time it will become bigger - or smaller. Will radio become more popular or downsized ?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I didnt say that, i said there is more room so there should be lower costs
You are charged for the internet, thus you are charged for internet radio as in essence you are paying for your "space"
i.e.your IP (static usually), exactly same as a radio frequency. In fact you pay additionally for data usage (bandwidth) which is something that doesnt exist on the radio.

Any additional charges over your internet connection are bulls*** as there is no such thing when it comes to radio broadcasting.

Aye, this is true, but i thought this cost would be towards the provider instead of the customer. Radio is free basicly to the user, so internet radio should be too.

I meant the cost for songs should be the same for TV/internet/radio use for the provider. They on the other hand could then charge their customerrs or find suitable advertisement to provide the costs.

No?

 

[Chronictank]

Aye, this is true, but i thought this cost would be towards the provider instead of the customer. Radio is free basicly to the user, so internet radio should be too.

It is for the subscriber, i think we got our wires crossed.
In order to run a radio station you need to rent a radio frequency, i matched this to a IP of a user running a radio station on the internet. Thats what i meant by you already have paid for the right to run it.
with analogue you dont rent the radio frequency it is a illegal (pirate) station regardless if they have paid royalties to the artists/producer or not

I meant the cost for songs should be the same for TV/internet/radio use for the provider. They on the other hand could then charge their customerrs or find suitable advertisement to provide the costs.

No?

Most legitimate radio stations do,
Virgin Radio - pop and rock music on the internet, digital, AM and FM
Pandora Internet Radio - Find New Music, Listen to Free Web Radio
Yahoo! Music - Internet Radio, Music Videos, Artists, Music News, Interviews, Performances, and more <- yahoo pay for the artists the user stations play
Yahoo! Music - Internet Radio, Music Videos, Artists, Music News, Interviews, Performances, and more
etc
etc

Illegal ones dont obviously, but they are essentially the same as you tube. Stations dont get closed until they are reported such as
SHOUTcast | Free internet radio!

Copyright Complaints

Nullsoft Inc. and its parent company, AOL LLC, respect the intellectual property of others, and we ask our Content providers to do the same.

If you believe that your copyrighted work has been copied and is accessible on the Nullsoft, Winamp or SHOUTcast websites in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, you may notify Nullsoft by providing our copyright agent the following information:

1. an electronic or physical signature of the owner of the copyright or the person authorized to act on the owner's behalf.
2. a description of the copyrighted work that you claim has been infringed and a description of the infringing activity.
3. identification of the location where the original or an authorized copy of the copyrighted work exists, for example the URL (i.e., web page address) where it is posted or the name of the book in which it has been published.
4. identification of the URL or other specific location on the [Nullsoft/Spinner] site where the material that you claim is infringing is located, including enough information to allow us to locate the material.
5. your name, address, telephone number, and email address.
6. a statement by you that you have a good faith belief that the disputed use is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
7. a statement by you, made under penalty of perjury, that the above information in your Notice is accurate and that you are the copyright owner or authorized to act on the copyright owner's behalf.

Nullsoft's agent for notice of claims of copyright infringement on this site can be reached as follows:

By mail:
Dawn L. Palmer
Senior IP Counsel
AOL LLC
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, VA 20166

By fax:
(703) 466-9170

By email:
AOLCopyright@aol.com

Most free station providers have a similar terms and conditions

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well then i'm against this.

Internet radio and radio should have, as simply as i put it, same rules. Afterall, radio is meant to be more of an information portal and as such, a public service.

Radio frequency rent/ip address or site rent.
Pay royalty for the songs on both equally.
Keep it free or fairly cheap for the customer(dependant on the provider).