Why College Radio Should Get Behind the Performance Royalty

Comments

9 comments posted

I respectfully disagree with

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on September 22, 2012 - 6:07am.

I respectfully disagree with the writer on one single count: that bands who do covers should be paid, instead of the songwriter. In my opinion, the current musical paradigm (referring only to what we hear on the radio) is already falling short on risk-taking and innovation. At this moment, there are already so many bands and artists doing covers, and resurrecting old and new songs, without much of a criteria. This would only encourage more bands to make covers, because covering a well-known song is much less risky than investing your time and effort on creating original material. It is not hard to imagine that even if the artists did not want to do any cover, their labels would pressure them into doing so, as it would mean more money and more chances of getting played on the radio. But, having said this, I can also see it in a completely different light. Maybe, covers are being played by radios precisely because they don't have to pay more than if it was an original song? And therefore, charging more for covers would make radios less likely to play covers, thus increasing the amount of original material on the radio? That I would welcome.

To clarify, Anonymous: We

Submitted by kevin on September 24, 2012 - 10:40am.

To clarify, Anonymous: We are not advocating that performers get paid instead of the songwriter; instead we advocate that performers get paid in addition to the songwriter. This means if you write a song and record it yourself, you would get paid twice when it is broadcast--once for the performance and once for the song itself. The argument we are making isn't really about cover songs, except that cover songs conveniently illustrate the difference between songwriting and performance.

Congress is currently

Submitted by VirtualSoundNW (not verified) on September 24, 2012 - 3:31pm.

Congress is currently considering legislation in this area, but as far as I can see the proposed fixes, while helping the performers, don't mention the college radio station issue you bring up. Sounds like we should contact our legislators and make sure they know we want to see performers getting paid for their efforts, and we want to include the cap for college/public radio stations.

I'm mostly basing my comment on a Slate article I just read: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2012/09/internet_r...

This would also benefit bands

Submitted by Franz Nicolay (not verified) on September 25, 2012 - 9:27am.

This would also benefit bands in which one member is the primary or sole songwriter, providing a royalty pool for the other band members.

Good point, Franz! It's

Submitted by kevin on September 25, 2012 - 9:55am.

Good point, Franz! It's only fair that all members of a band get paid for airplay.

I totally agree that

Submitted by Robert DuPont (not verified) on September 25, 2012 - 2:32pm.

I totally agree that performers should be paid by radio stations. College and public stations would pay at one level, commercial, for-profit stations may be charged a higher fee.

I have two questions. who would collect said fee, ASCAP, BMI, or the FCC? The other question is do Spotify , MOG et al collect a royalty for performers?

Robert: ASCAP & BMI collect

Submitted by kevin on September 25, 2012 - 2:44pm.

Robert: ASCAP & BMI collect publishing royalties not sound recordings, and the FCC doesn't deal with rightsholders. SoundExchange would likely take over royalty distribution, as they already distribute artist royalties for webcasting. The answer to your question about how payouts work for Spotify and MOG et al can be found here http://futureofmusic.org/article/article/new-business-models

to the comment on the top of

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on January 26, 2013 - 7:19pm.

to the comment on the top of the page about cover songs: do you think Jimmy Hendrix should get played for his cover of 'all along the watch tower' that he made famous? Bob Dylan wrote it, but Hendrix made it famous. Blinded By The Light was a number one song made famous by Manfred Man, but it was originally one of two singles on Bruce Springsteen's first album. Should these performers not get paid? Their songs sound nothing like the originals and they are the ones who made them famous, but they don't get a cent.

Non commercial radio stations

Submitted by BJ Mora (not verified) on March 22, 2014 - 10:07am.

Non commercial radio stations should be exempt from the performance royalty, with one exception: if they net more than $100,000 per year. Set the fee for the life of the broadcast license, no less than five years; this allows stations to plan. Yes, I know this would likely include larger public radio stations, and larger broadcasting groups. eg. the large NPR stations, but they can afford to support artists in this way. We should protect the smaller stations.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.