Plus Pages

Monday, April 13, 2015

'Fair Pay, Fair Play' Introduced In Congress

A bipartisan House bill introduced today would make AM/FM and satellite radio broadcasters pay royalties to the artists of the songs they play on the air, after years of remaining exempt from the payments. According to  The National Journal, the bill would also make digital radio pay for music recorded before 1972, which some platforms have avoided paying for because of a loophole in royalty rules.

As it stands, the amount an artist gets paid for a radio play depends on the platform on which his or her song is played. Digital radio services like Pandora pay one rate, while satellite radio pays another, lower rate. And traditional AM/FM radio is not required to pay royalties to artists at all—they only pay songwriter royalties.

Broadcasters say they shouldn't have to pay artists royalties to play their music on the air because of the benefits of the mass exposure that radio affords. A statement from the National Association of Broadcasters expressed strong opposition to the legislation introduced Monday.

"It is disappointing that this bill retreads years-old policy positions rather than advancing the copyright dialogue through policies that help grow the entire music ecosystem," the association's top spokesman, Dennis Wharton, said in the statement. "NAB stands ready to work with Congress on a balanced music licensing proposal that promotes innovation and recognizes the benefit of our free locally-focused platform to the benefit of artists and listeners."

The bill includes protections for small and local radio stations, which broadcasters have said in the past would be harmed by a royalty requirement. Radio stations that make less than a million dollars in annual revenue will only have to pay 500 dollars a year in royalties, and college and local radio stations will be on the hook for 100 dollars a year.

Rep. Jerry Nadler
"Large radio conglomerates will no longer be able to hide behind truly smaller and public stations to perpetuate this injustice," Rep. Jerrold Nadler said at an event in New York to announce the bill.

In response to today's press conference in New York City, announcing the Fair Play Fair Pay Act by Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), SoundExchange issued the following statement from Michael Huppe, president and chief executive officer:

"For decades, music services have gotten away with building their business on the backs of hard working musicians, paying unfair rates -- and in the case of the $17.5 billion radio industry, paying nothing at all -- for the music they use. The Fair Play Fair Pay Act introduced today will bring much needed reform to the music industry and addresses many of the issues that plague the recorded music industry.

"It is time that we properly pay the artists who put so much hard work into creating the music at the core of these services. If it weren't for them, these stations would be broadcasting little more than static.

"At the nexus of music and technology, SoundExchange is at the very center of the industry, representing the entire record music industry. In June 2014, we testified before Congress and laid out SoundExchange's guiding principle: all creators should receive fair pay, on all platforms and technologies, whenever their music is used. This past February, the Copyright Office put out a comprehensive report that laid out a similar principle and today we have a bipartisan coalition in Congress heeding the same call."

1 comment:

  1. I fear that the passage of such a bill will result in triggering the law of "unintended consequences". Large broadcasters will most likely start cutting exclusive 'deals' with specific artists to promote their music. This could result in only one station in a market being able to play Taylor Swift, for instance. And, gold-based formats will likely go away completely. Oldies and classic country will be province of small market stations (under the $1m annual cap).
    Whenever the rules change, somebody finds a way to make money with it. And, usually note quite in the way the framers of the bill intended.

    ReplyDelete