Bad deal for radio

https://radioink.com/2018/01/25/music-modernization-act-new-skin-old-idea/

I am afraid this proposed bill will end of music on the Radio. The record companies allowed the digital pirating of music by not adopting digital selling and safeguards till it was too late. This did have a negative impact on the song writers especially. IMHO the only real source of money in the music industry left is concerts. The performers traditionally made their money touring.

I personally feel the radio industry should get a cut of the performers touring money unless they can prove than we never played their music. Radio (music stations) help to sell music. If it were not true then there would never had been “payola”. I feel 9% would be fair. If the NAB were to purpose this I bet the performers would shut up about trying to extract more money from radio.

Seriously: What percentages do the songwriters get when thier songs are played at a concert? If songwriters need more money they need to look at the concert money and get more of it.

secondchoice said:

https://radioink.com/2018/01/25/music-modernization-act-new-skin-old-idea/

I am afraid this proposed bill will end of music on the Radio.

Click to expand...

I have already commented on this story on the RadioInk page. I don't expect this bill to go anywhere. I have no reason to believe they will even get a chance for a vote.

With regards to your comments, this bill is only about songwriters. Radio stations pay songwriters currently, and it's already a negotiated rate, based on radio station revenues. So this bill doesn't specifically aim at radio. It's more about digital royalties. Artists and labels get the lion's share of digital royalties. It's substantially more than what the writers get. So the writers want a better rate, using the same metric the artists and labels use. However, if they get an increase, that information could be brought into the negotiations the RMLB does with BMI, ASCAP, and SECAC to justify an increase there.

As for getting a percentage of touring money, some radio stations already get that in contesting and promotions stations do with concerts. Obviously that's mainly for stations that play current music. Since classic acts don't tour as much, there's not much money to be made from older artists. Of course that depends on the artists. The Eagles make a lot more these days than Poco or other 70s-80s acts. Songwriters get money whenever their songs are played, whether its on the radio, in a restaurant, or sung by other artists. All of the performances of songs are supposed to be reported to the PROs (performance rights orgs) and they charge the venues for those performances.

Today, the NAB, BMI, and ASCAP announced they had come to an agreement regarding the Music Modernization Act. In part, here's what they said, courtesy of BMI's website:

"This agreement resolves NAB’s concerns with the potential introduction of new evidence into the rate-setting process while preserving ASCAP’s and BMI’s ability to seek meaningful compensation from the growing digital music marketplace. Our three organizations have enjoyed a long, unique and successful relationship, and as a result, we were able to work together to find a path forward on this important legislation that is fair to all parties."

So while it didn't say how the deal would work, I assume it means that BMI & ASCAP won't use information from the rate court (Copyright Royalty Court) in setting broadcast royalty rates. I guess that means the NAB will not use its lobbyists to object to the proposed law. Of course if the songwriters are successful with this proposal, you can expect streaming and satellite fees to increase.

Having said all that, I still doubt very much that this will get to the floor for a vote. At least not this year.

How much do radio stations pay to be members of the NAB, and how much of that goes to lobbyists -- and from there to our elected officials and administration appointees?

CTListener said:

How much do radio stations pay to be members of the NAB, and how much of that goes to lobbyists -- and from there to our elected officials and administration appointees?

Click to expand...

Let me put it this way: It's a lot less than other industries, like telecom and music. A LOT less.

I understand that before radio got involved, the music business was a multi-thousand dollar industry!

It was announced that the Copyright Royalty Board has granted a rate increase for songwriters when their songs are streamed over the internet. This rate increase covers the period of 2018 to 2022.

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2018...songwriter-payments-to-rise-44-crb-rules.html

Songwriters have long complained about a disparity between the rate they received vs the rate received by artists and labels. This is designed to correct that disparity. This will likely mean a 5% increase in royalty costs for streaming companies like Pandora and Apple.

TheBigA said:

It was announced that the Copyright Royalty Board has granted a rate increase for songwriters when their songs are streamed over the internet. This rate increase covers the period of 2018 to 2022.

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2018...songwriter-payments-to-rise-44-crb-rules.html

Songwriters have long complained about a disparity between the rate they received vs the rate received by artists and labels. This is designed to correct that disparity. This will likely mean a 5% increase in royalty costs for streaming companies like Pandora and Apple.

Click to expand...

...who can't possibly make a profit as it is!

semoochie said:

...who can't possibly make a profit as it is!

Click to expand...

Exactly, although this cost will likely be passed along to subscribers, who believe music should be available for free.