Posted on May 13, 2009
Filed Under Monetizing, Philosophy | Leave a Comment
The Performance Rights Act is up for a vote this week. Speaking as a performer, the premise of this Act is long overdue, that performers deserve to be paid for their work every time their performance is played on air by terrestrial radio. But from what I’ve seen and heard, I have questions that the execution suggested in this act could be flawed.
The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is the main proponent against the passage of this Act. I’ve seen articles calling this a ‘performance tax’ implying (and I think I’m being generous here by saying implying) that the money goes to the government, to the argument that it’s free advertisement for the performer. I’m just going to draw a straight comparison to broadcast television. Any performer on television, be it in a commercial, movie or television show, gets paid whenever their performance is broadcast, no matter how much they got paid for the initial performance. It’s called a residual and for that matter, voiceover artists that do commercials on radio get residuals as well. I wonder what SAG or AFTRA would have to say if broadcast TV tried to not pay residuals saying it was free advertising for the performers.
That’s just one part… the next part is the breakdown of payout. Based on the segment of episode 096 of With A Voice Like This at the 06:44 minute mark the payout would be 50% for the master owner (read record label) and 50% split between main performer and session musicians (45% for the main performer and 5% split between the session musicians was quoted in the show). Well, no wonder the RIAA backs this ACT, their cut is 1% shy of controlling interest payout. Not all Master owners are major labels, Alice Peacock is an independent artist and her own record label, so it benefits different people in different ways, but the question then becomes what’s the percentage of indie labels vs. major labels played on terrestrial radio. It does beg the question of what’s fair for the performers. Are performers a disparate group like a child first learning about money and just as likely to take four nickels instead of two quarters because four is more than two? Because afterall, something is better than nothing at all.
Come to think of it, who does handle the royalty payouts? Wouldn’t it seem a natural fit for pre-existing Performance Rights Organizations (PROs) like ASCAP and BMI to expand their current charter and duties to handle that? Maybe, but instead a new single entity, Sound Exchange was created for Digital Royalties, including all performance royalties under this Act. At the 25:59 minute mark of episode 096, Sound Exchange seems to be doing a great job of finding that information and tracking down performers, but unlike ASCAP and BMI and even SESAC, Sound Exchange collects all Digital Royalties regardless of whether or not a performer is registered with or a member of Sound Exchange. In episode 048 with Samantha Murphy at the 08:05 minute mark, Sound Exchange has some strong ties to the RIAA, but despite that, there’s the question of what happens to the collected royalties that aren’t paid out, because the performer isn’t registered or a member of Sound exchange, deceased performers where no heirs can be identified or performers from countries that don’t have reciprocal agreements with Sound Exchange? Does that money just revert back to Sound Exchange and is that the best that can be done? If it’s collected without registration or membership, why isn’t it paid out under the same conditions?
With Technology so far ahead of an dated protection mechanism like the current copyright laws that are so desparately in need of an overhaul, is saying HR 848 is not perfect, but better than it is now enough or should we expect more? I don’t know, what do you think?
Posted on December 30, 2008
Filed Under Marketing, Philosophy, Podcast | Leave a Comment
The end of the year is here and on With A Voice Like This I took a bit of a look back at various stages among them were:
4-AM
News You Can Use
Shows that played My Music
And a special tribute to a friend and fellow musician, Morton Pliskin
[00:41:58]
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.
Posted on May 8, 2008
Filed Under Marketing, News, Philosophy, Podcast, Uncategorized | 1 Comment
This Episode of With A Voice Like This:
Hey, I’m not too proud to ask for help. I’m a little stymied trying to help the rest of 4-AM understand what the Internet can do for the group. They seem to see a website as mainly a virtual brochure for the group. I know it’s much more than that but I find myself in the unenviable position of new information not having the same impact when a colleague shares it as it would if it were shared by an outside expert.
This is where you come in. Give a listen, you’ll hear a few of my ideas and I’d really like you to share yours. You can drop me a line at contact@WithAVoiceLikeThis.com, call it into the Comments From the Podcast Gallery voicemail at 206.350.8955 or just leave a comment here. I look forward to your input.
By the way, does anyone know if PodCamp Chicago is still on for June 6-8? the information has run dry and I thought that would be a great venue to perform at and give the rest of the group a taste of what the Internet can do. Let me know.
Listener’s Choice
Well, this episode’s Listener’s choice is a bit of a do over. Kim Fenolio pointed out to me that there were different versions of Laura Clapp’s Not Responsible available and I managed to miss the one that Kim liked best. So to make up for it (since this is Listener’s Choice), I played a Laura Clapp twofer, The accoustic version of Not Responsible and Let It Rain. You can find Laura’s music on the Podsafe Music Network, at myspace.com/lauraclapp and www.lauraclapp.com.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.
Posted on April 18, 2008
Filed Under Internet, Marketing, Method, Monetizing, Philosophy, Podcast, Regulation | Leave a Comment
Originally this episode was to feature an ASCAP representative, but the timing didn’t quite work out for this show. so the discussion turned to an overview what issues were facing on the Internet with music and content in general.
Topics discussed are:
Links discussed in the show:
ASCAP’s Songwriter’s Bill of Rights
My previous post The Perception of Value
Podcasting Legal Guide wiki and in PDF format
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.
Posted on April 14, 2008
Filed Under Internet, Interview, Marketing, Method, Monetizing, News, Philosophy, Podcast, Regulation | Leave a Comment
This episode of With A Voice Like This is the conclusion of the discussion with Independent Singer/Songwriter Samantha Murphy of SMtvMusic.com stemming from the April 10 release of ASCAP‘s Songwriter’s Bill of Rights.
Samantha Murphy at SMtvMusic.com
Samantha’s e-mail is sm@smtvmusic.com
Performance Rights Organizations: ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, Sound Exchange
Samantha Murphy’s article written for a Princeton Symposium
Samantha also works with DigitalFreedom.org/
MEISA.org – Music & Entertainment Industry Student Association
Lawrence Lessig article – Commons Misunderstandings: ASCAP on Creative Commons
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Listen above or download by right clicking and saving.
keep looking »