Internet Radio Equality Act
Internet webcasters have been crying for somebody in the government to step in and stop the US Copyright Royalty Board’s ruling, and now it looks like they’re going to get some help. From an article at internetnews.com:
“The illogical and unrealistic royalty rates set by the CRB have placed the future of an entire industry in jeopardy,” Ward said in a statement praising the Inslee-Manzullo bill. “The Internet Radio Equality Act is the last best hope webcasters, artists and listeners have to keep the music playing.”
Of course they’d have to call it the “Internet Radio Equality Act.” When one person thinks of “equality,” he or she would think of things being equal. And that’s what this bill does, right? It tries to equal out the interests of webcasters with the interests of the music owners? Well, it’s precisely this attempt that makes this bill inequitable. It takes away the rights of the artists (and the record companies they sell their music to) in order to please the desire of a few people who want the artists’ property. To say that it’s “fair” for webcasters to set the royalty rates of an someone else’s music is to say that the person never had the rights to the music at all. It says that the creator of any intellectual property has a say in what is done with that property only up to a certain point, at which point someone else can take it. That point, in this case, is the webcaster’s desire to play music at a rate that can be supported with internet advertisement, but I think that once you take away someone’s right to their property it’s almost arbitrary as to how you do it and to what amount you do it. No matter how far you go, you’re still against it on principle. Today webcasters may be willing to pay $.0008 cents per broadcast, but who knows what it will be tomorrow? One thing is for sure: The one individual who won’t be setting the rate is the artist.
The only way we can achieve “equality” is for everybody to be treated the same under the law and for people to respect one another’s rights The artist who creates music has the right to control what is done with that music. Rather than respect that right, webcasters are trying to get Congress to pass laws that take what they want. If Congress will do such a thing, then what other rights may be up for grabs?
One of the things I hate about this debate is how it’s framed as a quest to “Save Internet Radio” when broadcasting music online is not at stake. People will still be able to listen to streaming radio on the internet after this ruling, even if all of the webcasters that can’t afford the new rates go out of business. There are plenty of stations that do have the permissions from artists, and there are many online music services that give you almost unlimited access to millions of songs. What’s really at stake for some webcasters is their own ability to play music that they can’t afford.
Tags: [internet radio, internet radio equality act, royalty rates, webcaster]Comments
Leave a Reply