Senate Judiciary Committee Approves RIAA Bailout Radio Tax

Over at TechDirt there's a piece regarding the Performance Right Act, which basically will mean the end of radio playing music as we know it. It's interesting to note the poll after the article where practically everybody is against this act.

It appears this is just another show of how our political reps are corrupt and getting their palms greased yet again by the RIAA and their cronies. When did the RIAA become a government-supported organization?

The more important question is, if these clowns somehow get this ridiculous act passed would your station change to a non-music format? Has your station management done any research or planning on the chance this thing actually passes?

The real question in all of this is: Who represents the public? The legislators are looking out for the labels, and broadcasters are looking out for themselves, but the royalties will simply get passed on to the public in more commercials or more "sponsored spins." How does that benefit the public?

The public has spoken with regard to the value of music. They don't want to pay for it. They don't want to buy it, subscribe to it, or sit through commercials. So the labels are instead trying to get their money from the intermediaries, like radio and ISPs, who in turn pass it on to the public, who continue to steal music from the internet. Does no one see this as a problem?

In answer to your question, I suspect the answer is: It depends. It depends on what the final law says, it depends on what options (if any) there are for broadcasters to pay for the new royalty, it depends on if revenues from non-music stations could be enough to support the music stations, thus allowing music stations to skirt the minimum revenue rule. It's hard to predict what the bill will look like. Even the bill that passed the Senate committee is likely to change before it reaches the floor, which won't happen for at least a year or more.