Local radio performance fees

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,430
2,613
Salem, OR
That they don't pay the artist royalties as most other media does would seem to be unfair. I wonder if radio really sells records anymore.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
That's not the point of the bill, or the goal of the movement. Stations already pay BIG bucks for music licensing and the group is asking for no FURTHER burden than that which has been in place for many years and worked for many years...before GREED kicked in.

Terrestrial radio pays the original publishers. In the case of my station, before we even turn the transmitter on,we let go of over $10k for terrestrial licensing to BMI, ASCAP, SESAC, and the newest leaches, GMR. GMR is a group that simply bought up "parts" of certain artists' works, then sent letters to every broadcaster literally DEMANDING payment, or, they'd sue us for $10k for every play that was not licensed. Certainly not a reputable way of doing business, but this is the way of the greedy music industry. OUR industry has not changed much, except that for stations like mine, if we stream, the singers get paid directly via Soundexchange, (yet another licensing agency.)...and it's our job to track the amount of hours, total plays, etc and report it.

Watch a music industry awards show and see the artists thank RADIO for helping them to sell so many copies, then watch those same artists greedily sign on to lobby our lawmakers to charge radio for their play, and you'll begin to realize, they can't have it both ways.

People don't listen to radio just for the music, so the claim by the music industry that we wouldn't exist without them is absurd. People listen to radio because talented program and music directors, owners, and engineers combine to make a RECIPE of entertainment of which music is part, and each of the parts of our recipe costs money. LOTS of money. Burdening us further with MORE than we already pay will, indeed, change the landscape of free radio media in the United States, and it's GREED that's driving that train, GREED from an industry already being paid for endorsements, use in commercials, concerts, downloads, and YES...for airplay. There is no reason for the music industry to place it's "woe is we....we're not selling CD's anymore" burden on radio stations to make up for their lack of keeping up with a music business model of today. and there's only so many times local radio can go to the well to find new sponsors to cover MORE licensing fees.

Side note, it was the GREED of the organization called CBS that caused the cancellation of the program called, The Twilight Zone Radio Dramas. CBS found that their licensee was successful in his radio revival of the series, and when the renewal came up, they wanted to charge the radio show's producer an exorbitant amount to renew the copyright use. GREED is driving the entertainment industry, including the music side of what radio plays.

With music licensing fees for small markets costing more than 10-15 percent of gross income, and the fact they charge it based on our GROSS income, (which is wrong in the first place) not NET after expenses; electricity counting for another at least 10 percent, insurance another 10 to 12, FCC licensing fees toying with 20 percent yearly increases, it's enough to make many small market stations think frequently about whether our service to our communities is worth the giving away of so much of what WE work to produce (with or without music being played.) Even talk stations have licenses for their bumpers, and THAT is not cheap,either. Oh, and did we mention...if you're a local business with permanently installed audio and more than "X" amount of speakers playing local radio to your customers and the thugs come to town from BMI, ASCAP or SESAC they'll bully their way into making your business pay for ANOTHER license to enjoy what we already pay to BROADCAST to you? Again...GREED.

Hope that helps folks understand, radio is NOT a license to print money, and the music industry should NOT have a license to rake us over the coals, either.

GREED is ruling in the United States, and it's rearing it's ugly head in the radio broadcasting industry, from the direction of the music industry. Plain and simple.
 
Last edited:

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,430
2,613
Salem, OR
It was my understanding that terrestrial radio only paid the composers, not the artists. If that's not the case, I'd like to see some documentation so I can correct my understanding.
 

radio

"On the Air" in MI
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2007
3,642
856
West Central Michigan
Over the air: The publisher (person who wrote it.)
On the web if simulcast from terrestrial station: The singer or group and the publisher.
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,430
2,613
Salem, OR
Over the air: The publisher (person who wrote it.)
On the web if simulcast from terrestrial station: The singer or group and the publisher.
You have the right people but you've associated the wrong titles with them.

Let's agree on some terminology. I propose:

1. Publisher (label) - the "record house" (Universal Music Publishing Group, Sony/ATV Music Publishing, Warner/Chappell, etc.)
2. Artist(s) - the people who performed the music (this includes the producer, engineer and arranger)
3. Composer - the person who wrote the song (this includes the lyricist where there are vocals)

I'll use Whitney Houston's I Will Always Love You as an example.

Publisher: Arista
Artist: Whitney Houston and a half-dozen instrumentalists along with engineers and synthesizer programmers
Producer, Arranger: David Foster
Composer: Dolly Parton

Of these, only Dolly Parton gets a royalty from terrestrial radio.

What ends up happening is that once that a song reaches death+80 of the composer (expiration of the song copyright), radio doesn't have to pay any royalties.
 

The Fat Man

Poster of Randomness
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 2, 2010
8,192
5,962
Land where we pronounce our "R" as "ah"
It does make it more the reason to have only overplayed pop and pop-country music on FM. And we will soon see the days where FM is virtually talk formats, between sports talk, liberal talk, conservative talk, and news radio.
 

Mister B

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jun 3, 2008
310
123
El Paso County Texas
What ends up happening is that once that a song reaches death+80 of the composer (expiration of the song copyright), radio doesn't have to pay any royalties.
I am surprised there are not more Classical Music stations then. Virtually all of the composers are dead.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
50,034
14,926
Northern VA
So are the people that want to listen to that.



Sorry, I couldn’t resist. I like Classical music and NPR is about the only over the air source. But I’ve ripped a lot of my CDs and there are services like Pandora.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,430
2,613
Salem, OR
I like Classical music and NPR is about the only over the air source.
Oregon has quite a few public classical music stations. KWAX, a station at the University of Oregon in Eugene has 11 repeaters. KQAC out of Portland has six repeaters. All of the outlets are public stations.

The ratio of classical music stations to top-40 is pretty close to unity.

There are many excellent classical music stations streaming on the Internet. I use classical piano and classical guitar channels to get to sleep.

bragging: Portland also has a stand-out jazz station in the form of KMHD (a collaboration between Mount Hood Community College and Oregon Public Broadcasting).
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Latest posts

Top