It’s too bad George Carlin died this week, as the prickly comedian’s scathing wit would be perfect for the current debate over whether AM/FM radio should pay money to the artists whose music it plays. It sounds like a simple question, but billions of dollars are at stake, and neither side looks interested in taking anything resembling the “high road.” How else to explain the fact that cans of herring are being sent through the mail and foreign ducks with suitcases are appearing in newspapers?
While radio currently pays the songwriters who pen the music and lyrics, it doesn’t have to pay the performers; by contrast, satellite radio and Internet radio have to pay both groups. As music label revenues have declined, labels and artists have naturally turned to what they see as a huge potential revenue source. The two bills under consideration in Congress would make all forms of broadcasting liable for public performance fees, but broadcasters militantly insist that they provide crucial promotional support for artists and should be able to keep spinning discs without paying.
The spat between artists and record labels on one side and broadcasters on the other has exploded into the open recently as Congress has taken up a piece of legislation that would force radio to start paying artists for music. At a House subcommittee hearing this morning, HR 4789 was marked up and passed on to the full committee for a vote, while S 2500 waits for action on the Senate side.
“Today’s vote comes as a complete nonsurprise, given the House IP Subcommittee’s history of support for the RIAA-backed tax on local radio stations,” said the National Association of Broadcasters after the vote. “Despite today’s action, there remains broad bipartisan resistance to the RIAA tax from members of Congress who question whether a punitive fee on America’s hometown radio stations should be used to bail out the failing business model of foreign-owned record labels.”
|
|
|
