If you stream ANY music, please read.

I agree Daz -- the issue here isn't that payment is required, it's that the amount is too high. Higher per listen than radio, which is horribly unfair.


BTW, y'all can feel free to stream my music; download it free from . A creative commons license is posted. (Americana/acoustic, and not quite pro quality.)

I just emailed my local Congress people again... I really hope something happens soon to keep internet radio from shutting down. I have an extensive list of stations I listen to, and it just kills me to think they may all go dead after this week.

What i I have a flash widget that allows people to listen to me singing with my friend on acoustic guitar, an origional song, never sold to evil corporations etc and recorded going on 20 years ago, it's been on the internet for a decade, will all of a sudden I be sued for playing music that I am the only one (along with my friend) who has any right to the song whatsoever? do I have to officially register it with a 'creative commons' site to ensure that the RIAA doesn't sue me?

SoundExchange appears to be the designated collector of royalties, and they have the right to collect royalties for every 'Performance' of a copyrighted work on an internet broadcast, BUT, a 'Performance' is specifically defined to not include a work that you have prior permission from the copyright holder to perform. So. You and your friend have to give you permission to broadcast royalty free, all done.

You may, however, have to prove that you and your friend hold the copyright at some point. It is interesting, not to mention disturbing, that SoundExchange is a universal collector. The RIAA can collect ONLY on the works it holds specific rights to; if it can't find the work on its list, it can't collect. SoundExchange by default CAN collect, and only if you have evidence otherwise are they not authorized to collect.

It shouldnt. This is a US law...



Anyone that has a radio station for entertainment purposes that uses music of another artist will be affected.



The royalty board is pressing this issue. But it is ok for standard OTA (over the air) radio to do this. But this is for an internet's version.



Just becuase it isn't on your TV or in your newspapers does not mean that it is not happening. I have heard of many people. In my own city, that have been arrested or fined for this.



Yup, off topic... ;P



PS. Cryas says, "Ditto"...



This law is not going to have a list of who is and is not affected. That list will be millions and the government is lazy. So yes, you will be affected by this stream any music that you do not have creative ownership on.

Please people, this doesn't mean that we call on the 15th of this month. We need support NOW! Call your senators and fill up their voicemails. They need to listen to the people they represent.

Don't worry about it or give it a second thought. Here's what you have on your side:

1) You're a tiny target and not worth going after. (Unless you happen to be filthy rich or something like that.)

2) You are the legal copyright holder, since you wrote and recorded the song. You actually have two copyrights: a Performing Arts copyright to the composition, and a Soundrecording copyright for the recording itself. Note that to get a PA copyright, you have to either record or else write down the song. If you just play it and never fix it in any medium, it is NOT covered by an implicit copyright. Sounds silly but it's a practical matter.

3) In the highly unlikely event that you were to be sued, you have at least one witness and probably more, and can probably talk about the process of evolution for the song, maybe even come up with earlier recordings or scratch takes.

However, if you're paranoid, the safest course is to *register* the copyright with the US Copyright office. For lots of info about that, see the following article:



Cheers,
Jeff

Daz, you will ONLY be affected if you play music that you didn't write. Furthermore, I seriously doubt they will be going after everyone who posted a YouTube video of kids screaming a cover song, or anything like that: there's no percentages in it. If they do go after things like that, they'll focus on the sites (YouTube, Soundclick, Myspace, etc.) and force them to police the standards. They would only go after individuals if those individuals are streaming huge numbers (of plays or of different songs).

This ruling is not about posting a video or an mp3 on your website anyway. It applies to broadcast services, not request services. Videos on youtube and the like would still be prosecuted by the RIAA as per usual, and they haven't hesitated to file suit against everyone possible, despite there being 'no percentages' in it.

not to beat a dead horse but please go to this link and call Your State Reps and Sens.! this is very important not only to SL but to ALL venues of independant broadcasting:

http://www3.capwiz.com/saveinternetradio/issues/alert/?alertid=9738601

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SaveNetRadio coalition is made up of artists, labels, listeners, and webcasters. Please contact us if you are interested in sponsoring an event, making a donation, or would like to become a leader in the fight to save Internet radio. The recent ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board to increase webcasters' royalty rates between 300 and 1200 percent over the next 5 years jeopardizes the industry and threatens to homogenize Internet radio.

Artists, listeners, and Webcasters, have joined our coalition to help save Internet radio. The coalition believes strongly in compensating artists, but Internet radio as we know it will not survive under the new royalties. We need your help. Please take a moment to call your members of Congress to let your representatives know how much Internet radio means to you. Together, we can force Congress to create a structural solution for this problem and create an environment where Internet radio, and the millions of artists it features, can continue to grow for generations to come.

About the Issue

On March 2, 2007 the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), which oversees sound recording royalties paid by Internet radio services, increased Internet radio's royalty burden between 300 and 1200 percent and thereby jeopardized the industry’s future.

At the request of the Recording Industry Association of America, the CRB ignored the fact that Internet radio royalties were already double what satellite radio pays, and multiplied the royalties even further. The 2005 royalty rate was 7/100 of a penny per song streamed; the 2010 rate will be 19/100 of a penny per song streamed. And for small webcasters that were able to calculate royalties as a percentage of revenue in 2005 – that option was quashed by the CRB, so small webcasters’ royalties will grow exponentially!

Before this ruling was handed down, the vast majority of webcasters were barely making ends meet as Internet radio advertising revenue is just beginning to develop. Without a doubt most Internet radio services will go bankrupt and cease webcasting if this royalty rate is not reversed by the Congress, and webcasters’ demise will mean a great loss of creative and diverse radio. Surviving webcasters will need sweetheart licenses that major record labels will be only too happy to offer, so long as the webcaster permits the major label to control the programming and playlist. Is that the Internet radio you care to hear?

As you know, the wonderful diversity of Internet radio is enjoyed by tens of millions of Americans and provides promotional and royalty opportunities to independent labels and artists that are not available to them on broadcast radio. What you may not know is that in just the last year Internet radio listening jumped dramatically, from 45 million listeners per month to 72 million listeners each month. Internet radio is already popular and it is already benefiting thousands of artists who are finding new fans online every day.

Action must be taken to stop this faulty ruling from destroying the future of Internet radio that so many millions of listeners depend on each day. Instead of relying on lawyers filing appeals in the CRB and the courts, the SaveNetRadio Coalition has been formed to represent every webcaster, every Net Radio listener, and every artist who enjoys and benefits from this medium. Please join our fight for the preservation of Internet radio.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is directly quoted from one of many websites involved in this. please go to www.saveinternetradio.net and make Your voice heard.

Finally some good news! See this thread under Resident Answers: /327/82/197194/1.html.

I'm not seeing the final tape here in this disscussion.. it seems very much 'ongoing' and unresolved.. the future for any form of internet broadcasting looks in doubt and the radio element is but the tip of the iceberg as far as the whole internet goes.

I forsee the potential whereby the whole of the internet looses its 'freedom of information' highways as big corporates see massive revenues from anyone who clicks a link.

The 'creators' of the hyperlink function, tried unsuccessfully to gain revenues from anyone 'using' the 'click text' method of using the internet, which effects 99.9% of how the internet works. fortunately they failed, but I don't believe this is a dead horse.... just a test case.

'Pay per view' could become a household 'word' sooner than we think.

In a nut shell and attempt not to confuse anyone any more or even for the first time...

These regulations and laws have been in affect for years. However, Now it has come to the point that more money is able to be made since it is a growing industry.

The Webcaster(DJ's) has to pay royalties for there music that they Stream via the Internet. Most have services like Loudcity,Live365 etc. These companies take care of your Royalty Payments and reports that need to be filled on you behalf. That is what you pay the subscription prices for.

With the increased Rates and the change to how the are charged will cause many stations and services like loudcity and Live365 out of business as they would not be able to pay the fees, thus hiking up subsciption fees that webcasters would not be able to be afford.

This would mainly effect the Small webcasters(DJ's). It is in the hands of SoundExchange, DiMA and Congress at this stage of the game.

It does not stop there as it is with full intent as stated by SoundExchange to go after FM stations next, for the same Royalty collections changes.

Best Information can be found at www.kurthanson.com and click on RAIN.

This only applies to US Broadcasters, for now.

This effects Non Commercial entities, Non Profit, Commercial, Sbscription based, Basically anything that can stream, with the exception of Video as that has something similiar yet different.

And it would certainly Effect Those In Secondlife that DJ on a stream. Its not cheap to have a stream legally as it is, with the licenses and other fees that need to be paid else you can face some time in Court with a huge BILL attached.

MMORadio used to be on air, it has closed his shop up after being around for a few years, due to the costs. There are many more on that list waiting to see the outcome.

I have followed this thread and issue. But I just can't seem to get my head wrapped around how my throwing an in-game party at my club where I stream legally purchased music from my personal computer to friends, or let a musician stream his live performance from his/her computer is such a financial risk. I own my music IRL and the musician owns the performance.

So, you can't stream music you have legally bought without paying royalties on top of that? How is streaming over the internet really very different than me playing my own music IRL through my wireless speakers with friends? Is that considered broadcasting as well? Is it just because you're using the internet - is that the bottom line?

Sorry if I sound dense on this, but I'm getting paranoid to play my own music in front of people - geez!

Yeah, Keth -- you and everyone else. Part of the problem is that RIAA is so vigilant about policing rights that they go way off the deep end. They actually, at one point, sued a girl's camp because they sang popular songs around the campfire! That blew up into a huge PR nightmare, so they dropped it and said that it did not represent the RIAA's policies -- and went on to excuse it by saying it was a camp for rich kids. Haha!

RIAA might like everyone to think that playing music at a private party should incur royalty payments, but reality doesn't seem to back them up.

However, there is a distinction between private parties and public ones. If you're using a ShoutCast stream, then anyone with the URL can stream it, so it's public. It's public despite the fact that you've set it up for a private party in your home in SL.

HOWEVER, the likelihood that you'll get busted for a small, unknown shoutcast stream is vanishingly small. And if they do contact you and ask you to pay or desist, you can simply desist. Or you can get feisty and try to defend it and put the burden on them to take you to court, with little potential upside for them -- but most likely costing you legal fees.

For small feeds, I wouldn't worry about this until it bites you. Thats just my personal opinion.

And yes, for your purpose of using the internet to have a private party, the rules are totally inappropriate and not what the laws are really intended to cover. This is one of the reasons we need better legislation in this area. However, your case is such a small minority that you're unlikely to find much representation.

Don't it suck?

My suggestion: get an offshore shoutcast server who isn't burdened by this legislation. Of course, we have yet to see how this is going to come down on that dodge. But legislators need to find out -- perhaps the hard way -- that if we overregulate the internet here in the US, the business will simply go offshore, and we'll just lose jobs, and RIAA members will not be any better off.

RIAA's purpose for existing is entirely valid. But much like the NRA and the CLU, they've gone way off the deep end trying to protect their turf, lobbying for ridiculous positions, and alienating moderates.

(How's that: I bet I managed to offend both right and left in a single post!)

Oops, Keth -- I missed an important point in your post.

You're talking about a club, not a private party. In that case, if it was a RL club, you'd be liable to ASCAP and BMI gents knocking on your door and demanding payments as long as you play (or have live musicians play) commercial music.

Why should SL be any different than RL in this case? When you bought CDs, you're buying the right to play and listen to them, but not broadcast them or use them as entertainment in a commercial establishment. Ask any RL club owner.

If you have a tiny business, the risk is probably minimal. If you're raking in the bucks big time, then you might want to consider consulting an attorney.

All chalked up to Corporate Greed.

These industries know that they're behind the times, and losing money because of it. SO- they go after easy targets. All in the name of the mighty $$$

2 words: F**k the RIAA

And in case they read this (if they know what a computer is): I haven't bought a single damn CD since 1992. Even Apple's iTunes is a better alternative. Most of the crap they're pushing out as "music" nowadays really blows chunks.

I'm bleeding lindens atm

This is all very disturbing. I enjoy my SL club and I've wanted to have a good venue for the live artists in SL to promote their music. The costs of running a club in-game are prohibitive by the time you rent a stream, pay live musicians, provide for events, employees, land, etc. I'll probably close if I have to pay stiff royalties on top of that. What a shame.

The UK music licensing society charges 100 pounds for a year up to 165,000 streams for a 'pure webcasting service'.


http://shrinkster.com/s3k

Surely an Internet Radio operation can cover that fee with advertising?