Performance Right Act UPDATE: Senate Judiciary Approval
Little update about SR379 – The Performance Rights Act
From Digital Music News (very trustworthy source published by Paul Resnikoff)
Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Performance Royalty Act…
Labels are still fighting for recording royalties from traditional radio stations, and on Thursday, the ball inched forward a bit. The Senate Judiciary Committee has now approved the Performance Rights Act (S379) for further debate, according to details emerging from Capitol Hill on Thursday morning. A similar bill, HR848, was recently approved by the House Judiciary Committee, part of a dogfight that has so far favored radio stations.
The recording industry is hoping to triumph through moral arguments, a tenuous bet. In line with that approach, musicFirst Coalition executive director Jennifer Bendall praised the Senate Judiciary action as a move towards repairing a deep injustice. “Today we are one step closer to righting a wrong that has existed since the early days of radio; one step closer to winning the fight for fundamental justice that has been waged by countless artists and musicians over the last eighty years,” Bendall declared.
Separately, the opposing National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) released a poll showing – surprise – that most Americans disagree with a recording royalty on radio performances.
From Ken Irwin over at Rounder Records:
Washington, D.C., October 15, 2009 – Today the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Performance Rights Act (S. 379). The bill will close a loophole in copyright law that allows music radio stations to earn billions of dollars each year in ad revenue without compensating the artists, musicians and rights holders who bring music to life and listeners’ ears to the radio dial. A similar bill, H.R. 848, was approved earlier by the House Judiciary Committee. The following statement may be attributed to Jennifer Bendall, executive director of the musicFIRST Coalition:
“Today we are one step closer to righting a wrong that has existed since the early days of radio; one step closer to winning the fight for fundamental justice that has been waged by countless artists and
musicians over the last 80 years.”“We are grateful for the leadership of Chairman Leahy, Senators Feinstein and Hatch and other members of the committee. We look forward to working with them and Chairman Conyers, Representatives Issa and Berman and other members who understand the importance of creating a
fair performance right on radio for America’s artists and musicians.”“We are making unprecedented progress. Two congressional committees have now approved a bill to create a fair performance right on radio. We ask broadcasters and the new leadership at the NAB to join with us. Together we can create a performance right on radio that is fair to artists, musicians and rights holders, fair to other radio platforms that pay a performance royalty, and fair to AM and FM music radio.”
“Radio and music have a bright future together if the artists, musicians and rights holders who bring music to life and listeners’ ears to the radio dial are compensated fairly for their work.”
Unfortunately, this perspective (from the musicFIRST coalition) is a bit one-sided. There are plenty of benefits to owners of Sound Recording copyrights, but a few things should be considered. First, while it seems great for performers, few of them own the copyrights to their Master Recordings (their label does). So while there are plenty of artists that can benefit from this, keep in mind that this issue is by no means a simple one. Secondly, I want to refer you to an earlier post that discusses who actually gets paid from performance royalties (I’ll give you a hint — it’s not the vast majority of performing artists). So before simply agreeing with musicFIRST and making an attack at “big bad radio”, consider the other ways in which the system itself is broken and how this legislation certainly won’t be the “silver bullet” artist’s need for “fair compensation”.
In regards to bluegrass, I wanted to share what a few notable members of the IBMA are saying about the recent developments.
Dan Keen (ASCAP):
“1. [Bill] Foster is right; there should be a level playing field for all broadcast entities a.) Digi b’cast pays this modest royalty. Its not a level field for them when terrestrial b’cast doesn’t. b.) All civilized foreign stations pay this modest royalty. Giving. U. S. terrestrial a pass isn’t level for them either.2.) Y’all stay away from the NAB koolaid. Don’t drink it! Any reasonable b’caster can tell you off the record that royalty payments are not the source of their financial stress. Believe me, big radio is all about making $$ Nothing wrong with that. If they thought they could make more $$ with Talk instead of music they’d do it in a cold heartbeat! Music sells. Respekt that. Its worth a single digit % from a $16 billion dollar industry.
3.) This bill continues to progress because the NAB shows its butt to everybody over it. I hope that they will soon be willing to have good faith dialogue & reach a marketplace solution. That is what Congress would prefer.”
I’ll keep you posted as the issue develops. Don’t believe what you read (what Keen calls the “Kool-Aid”). There is a lot at stake here, so before making an opinion, do your homework (there will be a test).
