Same old thing…
I’m starting to get my free time back, and I had some time the last couple nights to use my computer for fun. But what did I do? I debated the internet radio royalty rate issue over at talkobjectivism.com. I’m getting to the point where I can write a long statement on this subject in very little time. Since this conversation constitutes what little I’ve written this week and since my first comment is a basic overview of the reasons I don’t agree with the SaveNetRadio’ers, I’m going to repost it here.
The rest of the conversation can be read here.
Hi Mosley. I’m also a big supporter of the fair market, but in this debate I fall on the other side. I’m probably the only person outside of SoundExchange that you’ll find that agrees with the CRB ruling. I know this isn’t a fun issue for most to discuss, but if it’s ok I’d like to explain why I believe the royalty rates should be raised.
First, I believe that music artists should have full ownership and control of everything they create. Like all intellectual property, this means that anybody who wants to take or use the music the artist created should have to obtain permission from the artist. Most artists will offer you that permission in a number of ways. If you want a recording of their music, you can usually buy a cd they made. If you want to listen to their music, you can go to one of their concerts. If you want to play their music for other people to hear, like on a online radio station, you can negotiate a rate with the artist. (Who knows, the artist might pay you to play their music on your station.) An artist might even make their music available for no cost by everyone. Basically, it is up to the artist to determine who or what is done with his own music.
Second, the proper function of the government is to protect individual rights, including the right to own property. In this case, the government should protect the music artist’s right to control who can use his property. If someone takes or uses that artist’s property without permission, the owner’s rights have been violated and the government should step in.
Unfortunately, the government is not doing its job for music artists. Rather than protect a music artists right to control his intellectual property, the government created a “Copyright Royalty Board” that allows webcasters to broadcast music without obtaining permission from the music artist. If a webcaster can’t or doesn’t want to go through the trouble of negotiating with music artists, he can just use the government license and play anything he wants. And if a music artist wants to charge more than the government royalty rate for his music, he’s out of luck.
It’s important to note here that webcasters are the beneficiaries of the CRB, not the victims. Most people that protest the CRB’s decision to increase their royalty rates do not have a problem with the government’s violation of the rights of music artists. Their complaint is that thegovernment’s individual-rights-busting license will cost too much. Currently, the rates established by the government are cheap enough to allow practically anybody to broadcast other people’s music, and that’s one of the reasons we’ve seen online radio flourish. The CRB’s rate increase will make it much harder for people to use the government’s license, but I believe that they never should have had that license in the first place.
The ultimate solution to this government intrusion is to abolish the CRB and get the government out of the royalty-rate-setting business, but that’s not an option today. The debate is whether the government rates should be very high or very low. I think the rate should be very high to make the government’s license as unappealing andinaccessible as possible, because nobody has the right to use that license anyway. If the government’s rates are out of reach of webcasters, their remaining option is the only option they should have had in the first place: To negotiate with the people who own the music they want to play.
Will enforcement of the CRB’s ruling cause some online radio stations to stop? Probably. I still think that’s a better option than allowing webcasters to use the government to step on the rights of the music artists. I really believe that internet radio is going to be fine, though. I believe that if there is a demand for something, like streaming radio, the market will try to fill that need. Webcasters are always quick to tell you all of the benefits music artists receive when they play their music. If a music artist wants to receive those benefits, it would make sense for him or her to give the webcaster permission to play his music. Music artists still have the ability to establish their own royalty rates, independent of the government’s rate, so they can still get their music played on online radio stations if they wish.
Tags: [internet radio]Comments
Leave a Reply