SoundExchange, webcasters in deal to cap royalty fees

SoundExchange Inc., the group set up by the Recording Industry Association of America to collect royalties for performers and record companies, said it has reached an agreement with the Digital Media Association whose members include large music webcasters, to cap royalty fees at US$50,000 per webcaster per year.

The groups are still negotiating to set the rates for each play of a song, the two groups said.

The new rates were set by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) of the Library of Congress in early March and went into effect May 1, retroactive to the start of last year. The first payments under the new rates were due July 15.

The rate increase would at least triple the amount of royalties Internet radio broadcasters must pay to copyright holders per song, and it has been challenged by webcasters, Internet radio listeners and more than 6,000 artists over the past several months.

"This agreement marks an important first step in the Internet radio royalty negotiation process," said DiMA Executive Director Jonathan Potter, in a statement. "We're encouraged by this development and the knowledge that good faith negotiations have begun. We look forward to the next step of negotiating the royalty rates that will allow for the growth of the Internet radio industry, a platform for music discovery for consumers."

The webcasters, including AOL, Live365, MTV, RealNetworks, Pandora.com and Yahoo Music, have also agreed to provide SoundExchange with all the data of songs they broadcast so SoundExchange can accurately distribute royalties to independent artists and record companies.

In addition, SoundExchange and the DiMA will form a committee to look into the issue of stream ripping, which copies sound recordings in webcasts, as well as antistream ripping technologies. SoundExchange seems to have backed off its previous request that the large webcasters implement this technology as part of the deal to cap the webcasters' fees.

"This agreement shows that we can address specific issues of concern to the industry through private negotiations while upholding the integrity of the CRB process and while protecting the interests of SoundExchange members," said John Simson, executive director of SoundExchange, in a statement.

Neither the DiMa nor SoundExchange could be reached for comment.

Earlier in the week, SoundExchange also extended an olive branch to small webcasters, those who earn $1.25 million or less in total annual revenue, offering them a discounted rate though 2010. As part of the agreement, small webcasters would pay royalty fees of 10 percent or 12 percent of their revenue.

Small webcasters have until Sept.14, 2007, to accept the agreement, or face paying the new rates.

However, David Oxenford, a lawyer representing small webcasters, said the offer is the same one SoundExchange proposed in May and doesn't address the criticisms of the offer the small webcasters had at that time.

Oxenford said the offer doesn't allow small webcasters to grow their businesses, "artificially condemning them to be forever small, at best minimally profitable operations, in essence little more than hobbies," he said in the statement.

In addition, Oxenford said the offer only allows the small webcasters to play the music of SoundExchange members. If they play the music of artists who are not members, they would have to pay the new, higher royalty rates.

"The only way to resolve these issues is through meaningful negotiations, or through legislation like that proposed in the Internet Radio Equality Act," he said in the statement. "Unilateral proposals simply don't address all the issues that have caused so much outrage over the CRB decision. In order for these independent companies to build profitable businesses that will promote music and be able to pay reasonable royalties, something more than what SoundExchange has offered must be available."

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.
Rocket to Success - Your 10 Tips for Smarter ERP System Selection
Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Linda Rosencrance

Computerworld
Show Comments

Cool Tech

Breitling Superocean Heritage Chronographe 44

Learn more >

SanDisk MicroSDXC™ for Nintendo® Switch™

Learn more >

Toys for Boys

Family Friendly

Panasonic 4K UHD Blu-Ray Player and Full HD Recorder with Netflix - UBT1GL-K

Learn more >

Stocking Stuffer

Razer DeathAdder Expert Ergonomic Gaming Mouse

Learn more >

Christmas Gift Guide

Click for more ›

Most Popular Reviews

Latest Articles

Resources

PCW Evaluation Team

Edwina Hargreaves

WD My Cloud Home

I would recommend this device for families and small businesses who want one safe place to store all their important digital content and a way to easily share it with friends, family, business partners, or customers.

Walid Mikhael

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

It’s easy to set up, it’s compact and quiet when printing and to top if off, the print quality is excellent. This is hands down the best printer I’ve used for printing labels.

Ben Ramsden

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

Brainstorming, innovation, problem solving, and negotiation have all become much more productive and valuable if people can easily collaborate in real time with minimal friction.

Sarah Ieroianni

Brother QL-820NWB Professional Label Printer

The print quality also does not disappoint, it’s clear, bold, doesn’t smudge and the text is perfectly sized.

Ratchada Dunn

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The Huddle Board’s built in program; Sharp Touch Viewing software allows us to easily manipulate and edit our documents (jpegs and PDFs) all at the same time on the dashboard.

George Khoury

Sharp PN-40TC1 Huddle Board

The biggest perks for me would be that it comes with easy to use and comprehensive programs that make the collaboration process a whole lot more intuitive and organic

Featured Content

Product Launch Showcase

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?