@mhuppe: THE FUTURE OF RADIO: TIME FOR BROADCASTERS TO EMBRACE DIGITAL

Radio’s relationship with the music industry has changed dramatically in a few short years.

In its prime, radio was the dominant medium for music discovery – both new hits and back catalog. Today, radio exists in a sea of options and online alternatives for music enjoyment.

For many people, radio is no longer the primary source for listening to music. Indeed, radio’s most frequent listeners are 20% to 30% less valuable to the music industry (in terms of per capita expenditures) than less frequent listeners.

“RATHER THAN RESIST THE DIGITAL AGE, RADIO MUST EITHER RIDE THE DIGITAL WAVE OR HAVE IT CRASH ON TOP OF THEM.”

We urge radio to adapt to the new digital reality because the global music ecosystem is better off with a vibrant, innovative broadcast radio industry.

But time is running out for broadcasters to change the way they do business.

Read the post on MusicBusinessWorldwide

@MykiAngeline: @The_WIMN: Front And Center: @SoundExchange Senior Director Of Industry And Artist Relations, @LindaBlossBaum

[Editor Charlie sez:  Must read interview with a true artist rights advocate, Linda Bloss-Baum.]

Music has come a long way since the age of vinyl records and cassette tapes. It wasn’t that long ago when the only way to listen to music was either attending a live performance, tune in to your favorite radio station, or purchase hard copies from your local music store. Now with the ability to stream music from the internet, listening to our favorite artist is readily at our finger tips. Anyone with a laptop or smart phone can access almost any artist and song.

It also became increasingly harder for music artists to get paid for their creations.

This is where companies like SoundExchange come into play, working at the center of digital music to develop business solutions that benefit the entire music industry. As the Senior Director of Industry and Artist Relations, Linda Bloss-Buam ensure that artists and rights owners are aware of all the services that SoundExchange has to offer.

Below, Linda shares with us how she applies her experience and training in music policies and practices, and what she is doing to increase awareness of women in the music industry.

Read the interview on the Women’s International Music Network

 

A Must Read by Stephen Carlisle: Enjoy the Silence

Many times, I am asked to speak to student law associations and sometimes to artist associations. At these, there are frequent questions about the future of the arts in the era of unfettered internet exploitation. My response is usually in the form of a question:

“Did you hear that?

(Silence)

“Let me ask you again…did you hear that?”

(More silence and murmurs of confusion)

“That’s the sound that Spotify makes when it has no content.”

Which brings us to an Act introduced by Congressmen Darryl Issa and Ted Deutch on April 5, 2017. 1 The bill, informally known as the Performance Royalty Owners of Music Opportunity To Earn Act (PROMOTE Act) and more formally known as HR 1914, would for the first time create a legal right for the owner of a sound recording to pull their recordings from terrestrial radio airplay.

The bill itself is not complicated, running a mere 4 pages. It creates an addition to the exclusive rights contained in 17 USC 106, a seventh right, namely:

“[T]o prohibit performance of a sound recording publicly by means of a broadcast transmission (as that term is defined in section 114(k)) by a terrestrial radio station.”

However, that right may not be exercised if the following occurs:

“An owner of copyright in a sound recording may not exercise the exclusive right under paragraph (7) of section 106 to prohibit the broadcast transmission of the sound recording by a terrestrial radio station with regard to—

(A) a terrestrial radio station that pays the applicable royalties under terms described in paragraph (2);

IF AND ONLY IF:

[T]he royalties and terms described in this paragraph shall be identical to those regarding a license for eligible nonsubscription transmission services for audio transmissions under subsection (f)(2).”

For those of you non-lawyers amongst my faithful reading public, this means that a regular, over-the-air radio station must pay to the owners of a sound recordings a royalty equal to that which is paid by Pandora and similar services. If the radio station refuses to pay the money, the sound recording owner gets to pull their sound recordings from airplay.

Sheer genius, I tell you.

Read the post on Copyright.Nova.edu

@tnnnaterau: Fair Play Fair Pay Act reintroduced in Congress, would make radio pay artists

The Fair Play Fair Pay Act, legislation that would require broadcasters to pay artists and record labels when their songs are played over the air on the radio, was reintroduced on Thursday.

The bill is offered up on the eve of a possible broader copyright reform proposal from the House. Music industry stakeholders are hopeful that reform includes a performance royalty for terrestrial radio, because the United States is regarded as the only advanced country in the world that does not pay royalties to artists and labels to broadcast their songs.

Broadcasters are opposed to the bill and have successfully staved off past efforts to create a radio performance royalty. U.S. copyright law pays songwriters and their publishers when songs are played over the radio, but unlike streaming or other forms of consumption, artists are left out.

Read the post on The Tennessean

@allaccess: @musicFIRST Executive Director Chris Israel Calls for Fair Treatment of pre-72 Artists

MUSICFIRST Executive Director CHRIS ISRAEL commented yesterday regarding current copyright laws on pre-1972 music.

He said, “Consumers’ preferences for how they access music have changed dramatically in recent years. Sadly, our copyright system hasn’t kept pace. Our antiquated laws treat artists’ works differently depending on the platform we’re using to listen to their recordings. While the inadequacies of our system are evident every day, TODAY (2/15) marks the 44th anniversary of one of our system’s most egregious flaws.

Thanks to a quirk in U.S. law, songs recorded before this date in 1972 do not have federal copyright protection, and that is a huge problem. Up to 15% of all the music on some digital radio services was recorded before FEBRUARY 15, 1972. Streaming, satellite and FM radio have entire channels dedicated to this iconic music, yet this anomaly in U.S. law allows them to use pre-72 music without requiring them to compensate  the artists whose recordings they play on the air.

Many older artists have been forced to pursue fair compensation in a variety of state courts. This is extremely inefficient, unfair and unnecessary. Simple legislation will address this clear problem.

[The NAB royalty deadbeats had no comment.]

Read the post on AllAccess

@davidmross: @mikehuppe: Standing Up For The Value Of Music

[Editor Charlie sez: Insightful must-read artist rights interview with Mike Huppe, the CEO of SoundExchange.]

During the following interview, held at the Omni Hotel in Nashville, we covered a variety of topics such as what Huppe calls the AM/FM Artist Loophole, the DMCA Safe “Ocean,” internet enabled auto dashboards and the organization’s new ISRC online searchable database. Read On…

NEKST: Do you expect SoundExchange’s distribution growth will continue?
Mike Huppe: We’ve had unbelievable double digit growth for the past 7 or 8 years which won’t continue forever, but we are on track to have another up year in 2016. We paid out about $803 million last year and should be in the mid-$800s this year. It will naturally level out as we get bigger and the market matures.

Read the post on Nekst.biz

@CaseySeiler: No safe harbor in music tiff [Zephyr Teachout Campaign]

Why are a handful of musicians — a substrata of society generally predisposed to fall on the left side of the political spectrum — ticked off at Zephyr Teachout, the progressive Democratic candidate in the 19th Congressional District?

Blame it on the internet. To be more precise, blame it on Teachout’s former work for Fight For The Future, a nonprofit “dedicated to protecting and expanding the Internet’s transformative power,” according to its own website.

In online postings and outreach to the media, several artists have denounced FFF as having an “anti-artist, anti-copyright agenda” — an allegation the group denies vociferously. Teachout served on the board of the group’s education fund, but stepped down earlier this year after announcing her candidacy.

Those calling for Teachout to respond include the jazz great Jack DeJohnette, a resident of the Catskills who, in a recent letter, told the candidate, “It disturbs me that someone who seems to be running in support of the people is not further tuned in to the needs of us artists, who ultimately might be your constituents.”

DeJohnette said in his letter that since the advent of the digital age, his royalties from recorded music have declined 90 percent. “I am all over YouTube,” he wrote, and “everyone but me gets an income from this.”

The most immediate bone of contention for those hammering Teachout on this issue — a list that also includes guitarist Marc Ribot and Red Hook author and filmmaker David Newhoff — appears to be proposed changes to the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, in particular a toughening of provisions that aim to prevent websites from hosting copyrighted material without the consent of the copyright holder. Currently, online service providers are generally protected from liability under the so-called “Safe Harbor” provision of the DMCA, which aims to balance the interests of internet users and copyright holders.

Read the story on the Albany Times Union