Please look into this matter. Personally, I have spoken to two artist organizations this evening who have expressed their concern. Further, these artists groups seek a way to eliminate this language without jeopardizing the prospect of Legislative relief for small webcasters. There *will* be a strong protest from artists and artists unions.
This Legislation is the last remaining hope for 100's of small commercial webcasters who will be forced out of business on October 20. We need your help.
It is impossible to overstate the deep appreciation that all webcasters feel for the work of you and your offices on our behalf. We are tired. We are beaten. We are close to giving up. The RIAA is still running this statement on their site, which Michael Roe has since disavowed:
- Joint Statement From RIAA And Voice of The Webcasters On Support for HR 5469
Monday, October 7, 2002
Joint Statement From The RIAA And Voice of The Webcasters On Support For HR 5469
"The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Voice of The Webcasters (VOW) announce their support for HR 5469, the Small Webcaster Amendments Act of 2002. This Act sets rates and terms for the period of 1998 through 2004 for the use of sound recordings on small commercial Internet webcasting stations.
"The act embodies compromises for everyone involved. We appreciate the assistance of Congressional leaders in helping move this process along. We look forward to building business partnerships that create the best possible music experience for fans."
Roe elaborates further:
- Last week, much to our surprise (and everyone really), hr5469 was introduced by Sensenbrenner - a bill intended to provide a 6 month stay on the payment of royalties. If you read sensenbrenners own description of the bill, his intent was to obtain this stay for two reasons: 1 - provide further incentive and time for a private negotiation since the October 20 was fast approaching, and 2 - delay payment pending the outcome of several appeals and requests for stay.
The RIAA was caught offguard (as were we frankly) by HR5469. We were pleased. They were not.
The RIAA then rallied the support of AFL-CIO to railroad Hr5469 on the ground that it would delay payments to artists who had waited for 4 years to get paid.
It is clear that the House Judiciary wanted a deal. And given the fact that HR5469 was probably going no where in its original form, the Chief of Staff of the House Judiciary ordered the RIAA and our group to the House Judiciary last week - and provided marching orders to 'cut a deal.' Further, we learned that our once private deal would now provided the basis for what would become a modified version of HR5469. (Again, we went into this wanting to create a private, option deal. and now it had amazingly morphed into a piece of legislation intended to provide relief for small commercial webcasters. We were as shocked by this development as most of you probably were when you learned of it.)
Article comments
1 - no spam
I find the requirement of webcasters to uniquely log all listeners disturbing. I assume they're also required to turn this over to someone or what's the point. The TV networks have lusted over this kind of demographics for decades.
Does this new law supersede the Internet child protection act, or whatever it was called? Which required parental concent before gathering such data?
2 - Eric Olsen
For our slashdotty friends - we have a post today dealing with the Webcaster Alliance suit against the RIAA in the context of all they (RIAA) are doing to make the world a better place.