Both Sides of Debate Over Music Webcasts Unhappy With Decision on Royalty Rates

Internet music broadcasters and the recording industry, opponents in the debate over online music royalties, are both unhappy with a government decision setting rates for webcasters. The U.S. Copyright Office decided Thursday to charge webcasters 70 cents per song heard by 1,000 listeners. Opponents of the ruling can appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit within 30 days.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Internet music broadcasters and the recording industry, opponents in the debate over online music royalties, are both unhappy with a government decision setting rates for webcasters. The U.S. Copyright Office decided Thursday to charge webcasters 70 cents per song heard by 1,000 listeners, or half of what a government panel had proposed in February. Jonathan Potter, executive director of the Digital Media Association, said the rate was still too high, but was an improvement over the earlier proposal. “There’s still going to be a lot of pain in the industry,” said Potter, who represents webcasters who send music programs over the Internet to computer users. The recording industry had sought even higher royalties to compensate artists and music labels for using their songs. The 70-cent rate “simply does not reflect the fair market value of the music,” said Cary Sherman, president of the Recording Industry Association of America. In May, Librarian of Congress James H. Billington, who oversees the Copyright Office, rejected an arbitration panel’s proposal setting the rate for Internet-only broadcasts at $1.40 per song heard by 1,000 listeners. That was double the rate set for broadcasts sent out simultaneously on radio and the Internet. Billington thought the difference in the rates was “arbitrary and not supported by the record of evidence,” said spokeswoman Jill Brett. The lower rate now applies to radio station simulcasts on the Web and Internet-only broadcasts. Opponents of Thursday’s ruling can appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit within 30 days. The court could modify the decision or set it aside if it finds the ruling was highly unreasonable. If the decision is not changed, the first monthly royalty payments will be due in November. The fees are retroactive to 1998 and full payment of royalties from past years will be due in October. Internet radio — either simulcasts of traditional over-the-air radio or Internet-only stations streamed through the Internet to computers — is becoming more popular as people get high-speed connections at home. Robert Abbett, who sends Internet broadcasts of Hawaiian tunes from a spare bedroom in Kailua, Hawaii, said the new rate will cost him $13,000 each year and force him to shut down. Abbett relies on listener donations to operate. “I feel like we’re really getting railroaded and I’ll hold out as long as I can,” Abbett said. But, he added, “It very well could mean the end.” Larger webcasters said the rates would cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, more than they get from advertising or listener contributions. John Jeffrey, vice president of Live365 Inc., the largest Internet radio network, said even the lower rate may kill the fledgling industry. He said it will cost his cash-strapped company about $100,000 a month. “This is a rate that still means the majority of independent webcasters will cease to operate,” Jeffrey said. Webcasters like Live365, a network of about 30,000 radio stations created by individual Internet users, wanted a rate based on a percentage of revenue to pay performers and record labels. Webcasters, like over-the-air radio stations, already use such an arrangement to pay songwriters and composers. But the Copyright Office said that because many webcasters have such small revenues, there would be little compensation for those who own the copyrights to songs. Traditional radio broadcasters have been exempt from paying the royalties for each song played — the standard that is now being applied to webcasters. Broadcasters successfully argued before lawmakers that they already were promoting the music. After the recording industry failed to impose new royalties on traditional broadcasters, the industry turned to webcasters and got what it wanted with a 1998 law. Copyright 2002 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Trending Stories

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

LEARN MORE

More from ALM

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Privacy Policy

About Us / Contact Us / Site Map / Advertise With Us/ Customer Service / Terms of Service/ FAQ / Privacy Policy

Publications

Law Topics

Rankings

More

Law.com

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.