Why save Internet radio?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=39265
Printed Date: December 01 2024 at 17:43 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why save Internet radio?
Posted By: virginiaprogras
Subject: Why save Internet radio?
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 06:26
1. It is the source for the most diverse and simply the most progressive music heard on the radio worldwide.
Published: Wednesday, Jun 20, 2007 http://www1.arguscourier.com/article/20070620/COLUMNISTS10/70619059/-1/COLUMNISTS - http://www1.arguscourier.com/article/20070620/COLUMNISTS10/70619059/-1/COLUMNISTS
2. My vote for the most chilling scene on fiction film? It’s not a slasher, nothing involving Hannibal Lecter, not even the final moments of “Soylent Green.” No, my nomination for the Lifetime Achievement in Creepiness goes to the remake of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” As I remember it, the pod people are taking over San Francisco; one sign of their progress is that radio music is replaced with the single-mindless drone of a newscaster. The hero (aka Donald Sutherland) scurries desperately down a street, a perfect picture of paranoia. But wait! We hear bagpipes playing “Amazing Grace.” For a moment, there is a flicker of hope for humanity. Then the pipes are silenced in a burst of static, and after a moment’s silence, we hear only the newscaster.
This scene wouldn’t be so spooky if it were purely fictional. It’s not. Our human versions of pod people have several times taken over the radio realm, only to be subverted by the forces of diversity. In the 1920s, the number and variety of radio stations boomed, but fell under tight government and corporate control in the 1930s. To escape these limits, operators built huge, unregulated transmitters across the border, giving voice to the likes of Reverend Ike and Wolfman Jack. When rock ’n’ roll was under the safe control of the AM networks, saturated with ads, yammering DJs, and narrow playlists, along came FM underground radio and its undermining album-oriented rock. Remember KMPX?
When corrupt Republicanism reached a crescendo in the early GWB years, media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s Clear Channel was body-snatching independent community-centered radio stations by the dozen, leaving pre-programmed drones in its wake. The North Bay was lucky to have a good number of stations that escaped this plague, most notably KRCB, KRSH and KPFA. But with costs and commercial pressures on the rise, how long would real radio last? With the alternative voices silenced, would the demise of democracy be far behind?
I discovered Internet radio (IR) when my daughter got her own show at KZMU, the Moab, Utah listener-supported station. Technology, in the form of broadband access and audio streaming, made it possible for me to hear Laurel’s two-hour show live. Or I could set a timer to record the show on my hard drive, then put it on my iPod (no relation) for later listening. From KZMU, it was a short step to realizing that there were dozens — no, hundreds — of stations streaming on the Internet. Wow, what if there were a Web site “dial” for all these stations, a virtual community, combined with a pocket-sized micro-power FM transmitter? You’d dial-in your favorite programming at http://www.freebandradio.com - www.freebandradio.com , and your computer would beam the signal on your selected open frequency to any standard FM radio within 100 feet. Your garden-variety boom box could literally bring a world of music into your own garden.
The power of IR did for music and news what eBay did for retail commerce: it lowered the barrier for entry. Musicians out on “the long tail” didn’t have meet Clear Channel or Wal-Mart popularity thresholds to get a world-wide audience (long tail is a term for what you see when you plot the volume of music sales by artist. U2 is on the peak at the upper left; Toast Machine is out at the lower right, on the “long tail”). Combine this global reach with the search and collaborative filtering power of “Web 2.0”, and the radio business is revolutionized. For evidence, see my “dial” idea at http://www.live365.com - www.live365.com (they beat me to it.)
All of this beautiful music will go mute, however, if the regulations proposed by the Copyright Royalty Board are allowed to take effect as planned on July 18. Unless Congress passes the Internet Radio Equality Act, royalty fee increases of 300 percent to 1,200 percent will kill Internet radio as we know it. The fee increase will benefit only the big labels and established artists, as the long-tail artists depend on IR to build their audiences. Congressmember Woolsey is a co-sponsor of IREA, but Senator Feinstein, a critical vote, needs to be swayed. Call her Washington office today, at (202) 224-3841. IR is in the ER; we need to save it.
(Bruce Hagen is a program manager for a digital entertainment media company, vice president of the non-profit Petaluma Phoenix Center and a member of Petaluma Green Lane and Friends of Lafferty Park. His e-mail address is mailto:bhagen@sonic.net - [email protected] . All of his columns are on his Web site, http://www.bruce-hagen.com - www.bruce-hagen.com )
------------- "To err is human; to purr, feline." Robert Byrne
Newgrass, Prog & More! Web Radio
http://www.live365.com/stations/virginiaprograsser
2,200+ Progressive & Eclectic Fans Worldwide Since 2003
|
Replies:
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 08:25
when you see people, if effect, stealing music... I'm sure it's cyclic People steal and the artists ask from from other sources. Could launch into some diatribe about this being an a effect of the Reagan years.. of me first and to hell with others. People only care for what they can get.. and for how little ... music has never been free... nor should it ever be... most of us had to save our lunch money to buy cassettes and Lp's... not do a quick google search and download any album we choose to hear.
but I won't I guess. Don't want to go off topic.
Sad to see that happen to IR... but it is the nature of business and result of the loss of income from other areas.
|
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 11:16
I agree Mickey. It so sad to see people rationalize illegal downloading as somehow different than walking into a store and stuffing CDs into their coat, something they would probably abhor.
Its' the same thing. Stealing is stealing no matter how they go to the ends of the earth to justify it. Sorry, same thing.
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 11:52
Finnforest wrote:
I agree Mickey. It so sad to see people rationalize illegal downloading as somehow different than walking into a store and stuffing CDs into their coat, something they would probably abhor.
Its' the same thing. Stealing is stealing no matter how they go to the ends of the earth to justify it. Sorry, same thing. |
Agreed.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 12:03
Why save it?
Because Archive uber prog sage Dick Heath would want us to!
I confess, I don't listen to it, though. Can someone (again) post a link to a good channel or two, for troglodyte (proglodytes?) luddites like moi to try?
------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy.
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 12:04
http://www.radiokeneally.com - http://www.radiokeneally.com
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Melisma
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 12:43
Internet radio plays what commercial radio doesn't. Internet radio plays QUALITY MUSIC and permits us to discover bands that would not make it without a label. Yes there is download out there, but as a band member myself, all I wish for is for my music to be listened to. To pass my message through music. Internet is there for me and to spread the word. I think the labels need to know that buying radio transmission time is OUT. We need to hear what's out there and be able to overpass the laws that surround the transmission gimmicks. Here it's called CRTC and the best radio stations have been closed because of their conventions and laws... Internet in not yet touched by this. Get the point?
------------- Melisma
Life is a trip! Death is an odyssey...
|
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:22
micky wrote:
Could launch into some diatribe about this being an a effect of the Reagan years.. of me first and to hell with others. |
Haha, so Reagan invented selfishness? And, presumably, people under Carter were not? I understand that you are still bitter about the whole Iran-Contra thing, but the liberal hatred of Reagan sometimes seems to border on complete irrationality.
PS Blaming this on Bush is classy. Especially when it's the RIAA that's pushing this (looking it up, recently they were calling for increased royalties and claimed the right to collect royalties for artists not affiliated with them.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:29
Ghandi 2 wrote:
micky wrote:
Could launch into some diatribe about this being an a effect of the Reagan years.. of me first and to hell with others. |
Haha, so Reagan invented selfishness? And, presumably, people under Carter were not? I understand that you are still bitter about the whole Iran-Contra thing, but the liberal hatred of Reagan sometimes seems to border on complete irrationality.
PS Blaming this on Bush is classy. Especially when it's the RIAA that's pushing this (looking it up, recently they were calling for increased royalties and claimed the right to collect royalties for artists not affiliated with them. |
hahahha.. piss off .... it's a joke... you take things far too seriously...
|
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:31
Peter wrote:
Why save it?
Because Archive uber prog sage Dick Heath would want us to!
I confess, I don't listen to it, though. Can someone (again) post a link to a good channel or two, for troglodyte (proglodytes?) luddites like moi to try? |
'Are you going to Scarborough Fair, parsley SAGE rosemary and thyme'. La de da.'
(Traditional arrangement Martin Carthy - ripped of by you know who for the purpose of royalty gathering).
Peter old chap, you startled me out a trace induced by marking my 120th examination question today. Wot do yer mean bringing me into this.........
Oh well enough of this banter. Back to see if another undergraduate thinks glass fibre is magnetic?????????
------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.
|
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:34
If you'll note, I was laughing too, and since the rest of your post was serious it was kind of hard to tell. And I know someone who hates Reagan that much, so it wasn't entirely ridiculous.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:42
Ghandi 2 wrote:
If you'll note, I was laughing too, and since the rest of your post was serious it was kind of hard to tell. And I know someone who hates Reagan that much, so it wasn't entirely ridiculous. |
cool ... I happen to like old Ronnie, not hate him..maybe it's nostalgia though... he was a dottering old fool ....but he was honest one and well meaning one.
like Nixon.... an ace for the foreign policy... and a disaster domestically. It took his policies to make Democrats look fiscally responsible.
|
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 13:57
I thought you were more liberal. I guess the Off-topic political discussions all blend together after a while. ;-)
Yeah, we could use Nixon right now. He may have been a paranoid b*****d, but he was a damn good diplomat. And I'm sure he couldn't be any worse than W at domestic policy (I used to like him, but he has made a lot of mistakes and probably has wrecked any chance for the Republicans to gain control anytime soon).
But we should probably get back on topic. ;-)
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 15:33
Ghandi 2 wrote:
I thought you were more liberal. I guess the Off-topic political discussions all blend together after a while. ;-)
Yeah, we could use Nixon right now. He may have been a paranoid b*****d, but he was a damn good diplomat. And I'm sure he couldn't be any worse than W at domestic policy (I used to like him, but he has made a lot of mistakes and probably has wrecked any chance for the Republicans to gain control anytime soon).
But we should probably get back on topic. ;-) |
we should... though I think this topic is dead ... I think the nail's head has been struck with this topic. Blame the frickin kiddies and their need for free music for those increases.....
fwiw....I am a flaming left wing liberal, you've seen me there in off-topic discussions...however I'm just an honest objective one.
|
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 15:57
^ I disagree Micky. It is not dead but very much alive. Here is a good place to start:
http://www.savenetradio.org/ - http://www.savenetradio.org/
Lost of great article links for those who don't know all of what is going on. Big ground swell grass roots movement has gotten the attention of members in both houses of congress.
-------------
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 16:01
Garion81 wrote:
^ I disagree Micky. It is not dead but very much alive. Here is a good place to start:
http://www.savenetradio.org/ - http://www.savenetradio.org/
Lost of great article links for those who don't know all of what is going on. Big ground swell grass roots movement has gotten the attention of members in both houses of congress.
|
hey Brian... long time no talksie.... never mind being proved wrong
glad to hear it...
|
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 18:49
Well, to be honest this topic came up on a few other boards I post on over the last few weeks so I already had done the research.
Good to see you posting again Michael. Going to Nearfest?
-------------
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 18:52
Garion81 wrote:
Well, to be honest this topic came up on a few other boards I post on over the last few weeks so I already had done the research.
Good to see you posting again Michael. Going to Nearfest?
|
thanks Brian!
tried that link.... was down ...at least earlier when I tried it.
in Italy now ... don't think I'll make it hahhaha.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 19:08
got it that time Brian... it's pretty late here... and since the brain is on auto-pilot. I'll dive into that tomorrow. Thanks again for the link.
|
Posted By: virginiaprogras
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 21:53
The American Assoc. of Independent Music is NO friend of indie and small label musicians!
The following link is the letter source:
http://p2pnet.net/story/12538 - http://p2pnet.net/story/12538 )
It was sent by well-known Nashville entertainment lawyer Fred Wilhelms to A2IM (American Association of Independent Music) boss Rich Bengloff.
It remains unanswered to date.
I have nothing to add as it pretty much says it all. ----------------------------------------------------------- "Dear Mr. Bengloff,
I have noted that your organization has spoken vigorously in favor of the Internet radio royalty rates set by the CRB and due to go into effect on July 15, 2007.
A few things puzzle me about A2IM's position, and I am hoping that you can clarify them for me.
Music from independent artists and labels make up 30% of what we getto hear on Internet radio. This is substantially more than we hear on terrestrial radio, where the great majority of music comes from the major labels of the RIAA. Live365.com claims that 70% of the music heard on their client stations comes from independent labels and artists. That's thousands of stations, and tens of thousands of hours of webcasting independent music.
Live365 has stated that without permanent relief from the CRB decision, they will go off the air on July 15 because the only option is bankruptcy. There are thousands of other stations that face the same choices, many of whom feature music from labels that are members of your organization.
Yet A2IM steadfastly supports the rate structure that will drive these stations off the air.
My first questions are simple:
Who is going to pay your members their performance royalties if these stations that play their music now are are gone?
How are you going to make up for those stations going silent?
How are your artists going to replace the promotional value of getting heard on Internet radio?
If anyone should understand the value of a vigorous, varied and thriving Internet broadcast environment, it ought to be A2IM. The morewebcasters there are, each paying a reasonable royalty, the better the chance the independent artist is going to get paid, because there will be stations that play those artists, and promote their live appearances, and sell their CDs. Yet publicly, you're supporting a rate schedule that is going to eliminate the very stations that play your artists. promote their gigs and sell their CDs.
And, to be completely frank, the settlement "offers" that Sound Exchange has made in recent press releases are nothing but window dressing. All they do is postpone the problem while imposing limits on both revenue and listeners that will spell immediate death for any webcaster popular enough to grow beyond those limits. God help the webcaster who plays one of your artists who begins to actually attract a following. God's got to help him because SoundExchange and A2IM aren't going to, either under the CRB rate or the current SoundExchange "settlement" offer.
So that leads to my next simple question:
Do you think your label members would agree to a rule that if they sold "X" number of CDs in a year they would be forced to pay retroactive membership fees to the RIAA?
The webcaster who goes one dollar over the revenue cap, or one listener over the usage cap that SoundExchange has included in the press release "offer" is facing an equivalent dilemma. I would have thought that A2IM, made up largely of new and ambitious labels, would be acutely sensitive to arbitrary limits to growth that punish success.
I have read with interest your wholehearted embrace of the RIAA's campaign to get terrestrial radio to pay performance royalties. I would like to see a performance royalty in place as well. However, I've read on your own website that you realize that A2IM is going to have to provide the "poster children" for this campaign because no one can truly be sympathetic to a major label artist asking for moremoney. Yet, independent artists and labels will share in less than 10% of those royalties given the current terrestrial playlist bias in favor of the major labels.
And that brings us to my final question:
Why is your organization lending its name and numbers to a campaign gives your constituency so little and gives the RIAA so much?
In regard to these three issues, I really fail to see how your organization deserves to put "independent" in its name, as you are following the RIAA lead without much "independent" thought entering into it. To an interested outsider, it certainly looks like you aren't very independent when it comes to supporting things the RIAA wants.
When I heard of the establishment of your organization (and I even attended several discussions at SXSW about your plans on behalf of some small label clients), I had hopes that you would truly bring a new viewpoint to the conversations about the future of the music business.
I think the time is perfect for you to raise that truly independent voice.
I look forward to your response.
Fred Wilhelms"
------------- "To err is human; to purr, feline." Robert Byrne
Newgrass, Prog & More! Web Radio
http://www.live365.com/stations/virginiaprograsser
2,200+ Progressive & Eclectic Fans Worldwide Since 2003
|
Posted By: Spyro
Date Posted: June 22 2007 at 22:27
Stick it to the man thats my philosophy
|
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 01:55
^ No thats not what Internet radio is about.
-------------
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 05:30
virginiaprogras wrote:
1. It is the source for the most diverse and simply the most progressive music heard on the radio worldwide.
|
Speaking as someone who doesn't listen to internet radio at all, it is the forces of greed rather than rationality who are seeking to snuff it out. All of my music is payed for, the few downloads I have are freebies offered by the musicians. I think sometimes the promotional value is overlooked by the greedheads. Those who are taking advantage of the freebies may become your loyal patrons in the future, unless your music is crap.
On a politcally related topic, the so called liberal hatred of Regan pales in comparison to the conservative irrational reverence. And by the way, how is your guy GWB looking these days?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: virginiaprogras
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 06:01
"Day of Silence" coming to Internet radio on June 26
By Eric Bangeman | Published: June 21, 2007 - 10:47PM CT
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070621-day-of-silence-coming-to-internet-radio-on-june-26.html - http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070621-day-of-silence-coming-to-internet-radio-on-june-26.html
A number of Internet radio stations will be participating in a Day of Silence on June 26 to protest the retroactive royalty rate increases due to go into effect on July 15. Organized by Kurt Hanson, publisher of the Radio and Internet Newsletter, the protest is designed to remind listeners that silence is "what the Internet could be reduced to on or shortly after" the royalty increase begins. Related Stories
* Webcasters ask appeals court to delay 'Net radio royalty increase * SoundExchange offers olive branch to small webcasters over royalties * Internet Radio Equality Act would overturn decision on webcasting fees * Internet radio royalty hike delayed; last chance to petition Congress
In March, the Copyright Royalty Board announced that it would raise royalties for Internet broadcasters, moving them from a per-song rate to a per-listener rate. The increase would be made retroactive to the beginning of 2006 and would double over the next five years.
After the announcement, a group of broadcasters spearheaded by National Public Radio petitioned the CRB for a rehearing, but a panel of judges denied the request less than a month later.
In early May, legislation was introduced into the Senate and House of Representatives that would overturn the CRB's decision and mandate a royalty rate of 7.5 percent of total revenues. Neither version of the Internet Radio Equality Act has yet to make it to the floor for a vote. A coalition of webcasters has also asked a federal appeals court to delay the rate hike.
Daunted by the prospect of legislation, SoundExchange—the licensing authority backed by the major record labels—offered Internet broadcasters an olive branch. Under SoundExchange's latest proposal, smaller webcasters would remain exempt from the new royalty schedule until 2010. Large, commercial webcasters would have to still have pony up beginning in mid-July. SaveNetRadio criticized SoundExchange's offer, saying that it amounted to throwing large webcasters under the bus while simultaneously ensuring that none of the small webcasters would ever see significant growth.
During the Day of Silence next week, Internet broadcasters will broadcast static or silence interspersed with public service announcements asking listeners to contact their congressional representatives and ask them to support the IREA. According to the Radio and Internet Newsletter, webcasters such as Live365.com, AccuRadio.com, and NPR affiliate KCRW will participate. Hanson said that he hopes that larger stations such as NPR, Pandora, Yahoo, and Real Rhapsody will also participate.
------------- "To err is human; to purr, feline." Robert Byrne
Newgrass, Prog & More! Web Radio
http://www.live365.com/stations/virginiaprograsser
2,200+ Progressive & Eclectic Fans Worldwide Since 2003
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 06:16
"Hanson said that he hopes that larger stations such as NPR, Pandora, Yahoo, and Real Rhapsody will also participate."
Well, since these stations only operate within the US I can happily say: I don't give a damn.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 13:39
^Err Mike this issue is all about US based internet radio.
-------------
"What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?"
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 23 2007 at 13:53
Yes, my post was kind of off-topic ... I was trying to complain about the fact that with the exception of Napster virtually all U.S. based (or originated) services tend to ignore people outside the U.S..
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: StarsongAgeless
Date Posted: June 25 2007 at 14:53
Finnforest wrote:
I agree Mickey. It so sad to see people rationalize illegal downloading as somehow different than walking into a store and stuffing CDs into their coat, something they would probably abhor.
Its' the same thing. Stealing is stealing no matter how they go to the ends of the earth to justify it. Sorry, same thing. |
?!?!?! This isn't illegal downloading. Internet radio isn't something that you save to your computer, it's a station that plays over the internet. They already pay royalties for the music they play. The new regulations would force them to pay much higher royalties than they already pay, putting most if not all of them out of business... in favor of radio that only plays hit singles.
If you're clever, sure there are ways to record the music to your computer. Heck, you can do that with normal radio station, too. All you need to do is plug the signal in to something - anything - that can save the signal. So effectively, there's no difference except for the variety, and that you can get an internet radio station anywhere....
------------- Check out the http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=71 - Unsigned Bands section!
"Like the time I ran away, and turned around and you were standing close to me." Yes' Awaken
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 02:39
^ There are two different points of view regarding the royalties for internet radio ... either you think that the current royalties are ok, and the new regulations put the royalties way over the top ... or you think that the new royalties are ok and the previous rates were way too low. Personally I think it depends (or should depend) on the bitrate and whether the songs blend into each other (crossfade) ... the easier it is for people to digitally record the songs and save them like they would save tracks from download services like iTunes, the closer the rates should be to the actual purchase prices of the tracks (since not the users but the owner of the service pays the royalties the number of users - or rather the number of "downloads" per track also must be taken into account).
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: StarsongAgeless
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 12:59
^ Sure, royalty rates should reflect how easy it is for someone to steal the music, but the proposed increases have nothing to do with that (unfortunately). The new royalty rates will be royalties paid per listener, rather than per song. Because the rates are retroactive, a huge amount of stations will go bankrupt the instant the law goes into effect. This seems to tell me that this law has nothing to do with whether or not the royalty rates were/are fair to the artists. This is all about lining some people's pockets with money, while stamping out a ton of small businesses.
If someone actually wanted to increase royalties paid to the artists themselves, they'd want the businesses that are paying them to stay in business. But as soon as these businesses declare bankruptcy, boom - their debts are wiped out, and the artists don't necessarily ever see a dime past that.
So if they want to raise the royalties, sure! Why not? But why raise them to be so high as to destroy the businesses that are paying the royalties? Probably because somebody wants all those businesses gone.
------------- Check out the http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=71 - Unsigned Bands section!
"Like the time I ran away, and turned around and you were standing close to me." Yes' Awaken
|
Posted By: StarsongAgeless
Date Posted: June 26 2007 at 13:07
Sorry about that... I don't know how my post ended up on here twice. Maybe I pressed the button twice by accident?
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: June 28 2007 at 20:35
micky wrote:
when you see people, if effect, stealing music... I'm sure it's cyclic People steal and the artists ask from from other sources. Could launch into some diatribe about this being an a effect of the Reagan years.. of me first and to hell with others. People only care for what they can get.. and for how little ... music has never been free... nor should it ever be... most of us had to save our lunch money to buy cassettes and Lp's... not do a quick google search and download any album we choose to hear.
but I won't I guess. Don't want to go off topic.
Sad to see that happen to IR... but it is the nature of business and result of the loss of income from other areas.
|
Rather than target the consumer, could you think about the dung heads at the the major labels. They had a chance to agree to a licensing agreement with Napster back in the day ... $10 monthly subscription fee for users, and then let's figure out how to divide up the revenue. The labels backed out, fearing the heat they would get from the retailers. At the time, Napster had 20 million users. Since then, they've played the legal card, suing P2P users to little avail, started their own music download services that were loaded with so many limitations (streaming only, high subscription fees, limited burning options etc ...), then tried to force Itunes to increase the 99 cent price per download (thank you Steve Jobs for refusing to kill your successful concept with another hairbrained unreal label brainstorm), and now they're left to squeeze out revenue elsewhere. Do you want to bet that many stations will simply refuse to play music by acts that charge such exhorbitant fees ? Leave it to the music business to give itself the "business" over & over again until it's dead. For some reason, they still believe they can "force" people to pay what the label wants for music, as they could even 10 years ago ... remember the 70 minute CD with 2 good songs that you paid $20 for 'cause you couldn't get those songs any other way ? If the major labels insist on killing themselves by their lack of vision, lack of reality etc ... I am not the one who is going to lose sleep over any of their "efforts" to extort revenue any which way they can. I rarely buy major label acts, and my radio listening is practically a thing of the past due to the 20 minutes of commercials & 10 minutes of music, the overplaying of the same songs, many that used to be among my favourites, and the insistence that central programming is the best way to generate long term revenue. Within 10 years, our business schools will be using them as study cases to show how to run a business into the ground. The music will live on. It will not resemble anything that we have seen yet, but there are examples already showing up. Keep your eyes & ears open, things are going to get very interesting now that the music fan has escaped from under the records label's thumb.
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: July 17 2007 at 15:43
StarsongAgeless wrote:
Finnforest wrote:
I agree Mickey. It so sad to see people rationalize illegal downloading as somehow different than walking into a store and stuffing CDs into their coat, something they would probably abhor.
Its' the same thing. Stealing is stealing no matter how they go to the ends of the earth to justify it. Sorry, same thing. |
?!?!?! This isn't illegal downloading. Internet radio isn't something that you save to your computer, it's a station that plays over the internet. They already pay royalties for the music they play. The new regulations would force them to pay much higher royalties than they already pay, putting most if not all of them out of business... in favor of radio that only plays hit singles.
If you're clever, sure there are ways to record the music to your computer. Heck, you can do that with normal radio station, too. All you need to do is plug the signal in to something - anything - that can save the signal. So effectively, there's no difference except for the variety, and that you can get an internet radio station anywhere....
|
You misunderstood me, I was speaking strictly about illegal downloading. I wasn't slamming Internet Radio.
|
Posted By: wooty
Date Posted: July 18 2007 at 07:28
Why would I download something if I don't know what it sounds like? The fact of the matter is Internet radio exposed me to an entire world of music which I have then purchased from Doug Larson or Greg Walker because I now know what some of this rare stuff sounds like. Killing internet radio would prevent me from PURCHASING a great amount of music simply because I wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to hear it. The unheard artist lose out
------------- "We turn and turn in the animal belly, the mineral belly, the belly of time. To find the way out: the poem."
|
|