iWebRadio.com

Music Industry Proposes a Piracy Surcharge on ISPs

By Frank Rose | Wired.com

Having failed to stop piracy by suing internet users, the music industry is for the first time seriously considering a file sharing surcharge that internet service providers would collect from users.

In recent months, some of the major labels have warmed to a pitch by Jim Griffin, one of the idea's chief proponents, to seek an extra fee on broadband connections and to use the money to compensate rights holders for music that's shared online. Griffin, who consults on digital strategy for three of the four majors, will argue his case at what promises to be a heated.

"It's monetizing the anarchy," says Peter Jenner, head of the International Music Manager's Forum, who plans to join Griffin on the panel.

Griffin's idea is to collect a fee from internet service providers -- something like $5 per user per month -- and put it into a pool that would be used to compensate songwriters, performers, publishers and music labels. A collecting agency would divvy up the money according to artists' popularity on P2P sites, just as ASCAP and BMI pay songwriters for broadcasts and live performances of their work.

Does the Copyright Royalty Board Legally Exist?

Internet Radio Appeal Proceeds and New Issues Arise.
June 1, 2008 | Posted By David Oxenford

The appeals of last year's Copyright Royalty Board decision on the royalties paid for the use of sound recordings by Internet radio stations continue on, and one recent filing raises interesting questions of whether or not the CRB was properly appointed. Last week, the Department of Justice, which represents the CRB in defending its decision in the Court of Appeals, filed its brief in opposition to the briefs of the webcasters. The DOJ brief essentially argued that the webcasters' briefs were insufficient to satisfy the requirement for a successful appeal - that the CRB decision was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise contrary to law. Essentially, a Court need not revisit the decision and substitute its judgment as to whether it believes that the decision was correct, but instead, to overturn a decision, the Court must find that the CRB (the expert agency) either violated the law or could not, on the fact, have logically come up with the decision that it did. Thus, the DOJ brief made arguments that there was enough factual evidence for the CRB to decide in the way that it did, and made arguments that the webcasters had not offered contrary arguments or evidence on certain points during the CRB proceeding and were therefore barred from raising those arguments now. Just before the DOJ brief was filed, another pleading raised the fundamental question of whether the Copyright Royalty Board was properly appointed and, if not, whether it has the constitutional authority to decide the cases that it has been considering.

INTERNET RADIO MAKES A COMEBACK IN THE SENATE

The Grassroots Movement to Save Internet Radio from Extinction is Reinvigorated by Senate Judiciary Committee � Brownback Offers Industry Saving Legislation
May 15th, 2008 | SaveNetRadio

WASHINGTON D.C. � Legislation introduced in the House and the Senate last year to bring parity and equality to the new radio market made a comeback today during a Senate Judiciary mark-up. The Internet Radio Equality Act (IREA), which would establish a flat rate for performance royalty fees paid by cable, satellite and Internet radio providers, was offered as an amendment to the Orphan Works Act of 2008 (S. 2913) by Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) during a scheduled mark-up of the intellectual property legislation today.

The amendment, which was later withdrawn, signals the renewed efforts of Net radio webcasters to reverse an unprecedented 2007 rate increase by the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) that threatens to bankrupt the industry. Expressing his �strong support for internet radio,� Chairman Leahy welcomed future consideration of Internet radio royalties.

�It has been more than a year since the CRB raised the cost of webcasting to an untenable amount,� said Jake Ward, spokesperson for the SaveNetRadio campaign, �and all we are is a year older. Last year, more than two million people called on Congress to take action, and 150 Members in the House and Senate heard them and signed on in support of the Internet Radio Equality Act, but we still don�t have a solution. In the past year, rates have been set for net radio�s direct competition, satellite and cable radio providers, at a rate three and four times less than their proposals to Internet radio. It is disappointing and absurd that while Net radio is fighting for its survival, the industry has been put at an even greater disadvantage. This is unacceptable and hardly the good faith negotiations the House Commerce committee directed SoundExchange to participate in more than nine months ago.�

If music DRM is dead, the RIAA expects its resurrection

By Jacqui Cheng | Ars Technica Published: May 08, 2008 - 02:11PM CT

Despite widespread declarations of the death of DRM in music, the Recording Industry Association of America insists that it's far from dead. At the Digital Hollywood conference taking place in Los Angeles this week, the organization argued that DRM is still used in the large majority of music distribution methods. Not only that, but DRM is poised to make a comeback to make up for where it has fallen.

"(Recently) I made a list of the 22 ways to sell music and 20 of them still require DRM," RIAA technology unit head David Hughes said during a panel discussion, according to CNet. "Any form of subscription service or limited play-per-view or advertising offer still requires DRM. So DRM is not dead."

Hughes' statement comes just four months after the last of the Big Four music labels decided to ditch DRM for some sales. Sony BMG joined EMI, Universal, and Warner in selling DRM-free MP3 files through Amazon's MP3 service (in addition to a rather large handful of independent labels), making Amazon the only online destination that sells unprotected music from all of the majors. Other music stores offer some DRM-free selections too, like the iTunes Store, the Zune Marketplace, eMusic, and Amie Street, to name a few.

RIAA escapes sanctions, drops case against homeless man

By Eric Bangeman |Ars Technica Published: April 18, 2008

So far we've had grandmothers, dead people, disabled single mothers, and today, we can add another category to the list of those targeted by the RIAA: the homeless. Earlier this week, the RIAA decided to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit against Chaz Berry after learning he was living in a homeless shelter�but not until after a magistrate judge denied an earlier motion for summary judgment and recommended sanctions against the RIAA's attorneys.

Berry was sued by the RIAA in February 2007 for copyright infringement after an IP address logged by MediaSentry on a P2P network was traced back to his AOL account. When the time came for Berry to be served with a copy of the complaint, the RIAA discovered that he had vacated his apartment. A pretrial conference scheduled for April 19, 2007, was postponed for 60 days at the labels' request, due to the RIAA's professed inability to serve Berry with a summons at his last-known address.

The RIAA said in its April 17 filing that it was "conducting a thorough address investigation" so it could serve Berry with a copy of the summons. But that wasn't quite right: it turns out that the RIAA's process server slapped a copy of the summons "in a conspicuous place" at Berry's last known address on April 9�a full eight days before the RIAA said it couldn't locate him. The process server's attempts were detailed in an April 25, 2007, affidavit completed by the process server, who also said that a copy was sent via first-class mail to the same address.

RIAA doesn't want to pay for a fair defense, says victor

By Eric Bangeman | ArsTechnica Published: March 26, 2008

Even as exonerated file-sharing defendant Tanya Andersen pursues her malicious prosecution case against the music industry, there is some unattended business left over from the RIAA's original copyright infringement lawsuit. After the RIAA threw in the towel on its lawsuit against Andersen, she sought and won an award of attorneys' fees. The two parties are now trying to settle the bill, and the RIAA is only willing to pay one tenth of what Andersen's attorney is seeking.

Andersen's attorney, Lory Lybeck, is looking for just under $300,000 in fees from his defense of Andersen. The $298,995 figure submitted to the court includes a "multiplier" of two times the "reasonable" hourly rates due to the "high risk, successful" defense (Oregon law allows for multipliers).

In a brief filed earlier this month, the RIAA called the $298,995 figure "excessive" and said that it should be drastically slashed to something along the lines of $30,000. In the RIAA's opinion, Atlantic v. Andersen was a "straightforward copyright infringement claim," and the labels' independent expert believes that the fees sought are excessive "in numerous respects."

Lybeck takes issue with the RIAA's characterization of the case in his reply to the RIAA's brief. "Contrary to plaintiffs' argument, this copyright case was anything but typical or 'straightforward,'" argues Lybeck. "As the court has previously found, the proceedings were complicated, prolonged, and made more expensive by the plaintiffs' unreasonable tactics throughout the case."

Internet Radio in your Car!

Thats right it's here people!

Not only is Internet Radio available on any SmartPhone capable of Internet Access, now Internet Radio streaming to your car isn't a pipe dream for years away. It's available right now, and using the new Ford SYNC, it's available this Fall using voice command. Known as "GeekCasting" the ability to access Internet Radio stations is the "Not-So-Distant-Future" today. The new line of Fords with SYNC will allow for easy access to Internet Streaming Radio through simple voice commands and will interface with most any SmartPhone or even BlueTooth.

Check out the video news about this revolution. Now Internet Radio will be able to challenge Satellite and AM/FM radio on its own terms. What will this mean for the future of Internet Radio? Well with the capability to "GeekCast" to commuters in their cars, the face of Internet Radio is about to change. And the future is looking good...

What does this mean for iWebRadio? A whole new venue to get heard, a new way to get listeners and a new medium in which to grow. Could this mean oversight by the FCC in the near future? That may very well be. We here at iWebRadio will keep an eye on these developments and bring them to you. In the meantime, the ability to be able to enjoy iWebRadio and other Internet Radio from your car is no longer a pipe dream. So dont be surprised if you one day hear iWebRadio in your car!

Swedish Record Labels See Filesharing as Virtue

Written by Ernesto on February 27, 2008

While the RIAA sues its customers, and blames filesharing for the decrease in record sales, a coalition of seven independent Swedish record labels explores alternatives that make use of the Internet and filesharing technology.

The increase in music piracy is a signal that customers want something that is simply not available. High quality, DRM-free music that they can buy online for a reasonable price. Filesharing , and the coalition of Swedish record labels understands this, as they introduce The Swedish Model. They write:

"We in the music industry have shown ourselves unable to follow in this change. Some of us have even waged war against those the music is recorded for � the listeners. The rift between producers and consumers has never been bigger. �The truth is that Internet has provided us with a fantastic grey scale of possibilities! Instead of fighting back we ought to obtain learning from the daily newspaper and the computer game industries. They early realized the superiority of the internet and developed new services there."

RIAA plays both sides of the street in music royalty debate

By Nate Anderson | Published: March 02, 2008 - 08:24PM CT

Readers will no doubt be shocked�shocked�to hear that the RIAA works for its own self-interest, but a recent Public Knowledge piece suggests that the organization is being more than usually self-interested in two current debates. On the one hand, the major labels think that webcasters should pay a flat rate for every track streamed, even if this means that a webcaster's total bill for music exceeds revenues in any given year. On the other hand, the RIAA does not want to pay a flat rate for its own music, suggesting that a percentage rate of the kind that webcasters were denied is the way to go.

No hobgoblins here
If consistency is the "hobgoblin of little minds," as Emerson put it, then the music industry must have a collective brain the size of the moon. Contradictions and paradoxes abound. For instance: why does satellite radio pay artists and songwriters for playing their songs, but terrestrial radio only pays songwriters? Why do webcasters also pay both, but at a different rate?

When it came to setting webcaster rates last year, the webcasters wanted to pay a percentage, just like satellite radio services do. But revenue is hard to come by in the webcasting business, so SoundExchange (an RIAA spinoff that collects the money and redistributes it to labels and artists) pushed for a flat fee per stream per user. And it got it last March when the Copyright Royalty Board set the fee at $0.0011 per song streamed.

RIAA Keeps Settlement Money, Artists May Sue

Written by enigmax on February 28, 2008
Despite collecting an estimated several hundred million dollars in P2P related settlements from the likes of Napster, KaZaA and Bolt, prominent artists� managers are complaining that so far, they haven�t received any compensation from the labels. According to a lawyer, some are considering legal action.

When EMI, Universal Music and Warner music reached settlement agreements with the likes of Napster, KaZaA and Bolt, they collected hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation - money that was supposed to go to artists whose rights had been allegedly infringed upon when the networks were operating with unlicensed music.

Now, according to an article, the managers of some major artists are getting very impatient, as it appears the very people who were supposed to be compensated - the artists - haven�t received anything from the massive settlements. They say the cash - estimated to be as much as $400m - hasn�t filtered through to their clients and understandably they�re getting very impatient.