Vivvo CMS 4.1 http://www.rbr.com/ ©2010 Spoonlabs d.o.o. http://www.rbr.com/files.php?file=rss_logo1_757997737.jpg http://www.rbr.com/ http://www.rbr.com/radio/21469.html Radio News Fri, 19 Feb 2010 14:41:00 -0500 Members of the recording industry have banded together to write a letter to members of Congress blasting the NAB’s opposition to the Performance Rights Radio News Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:29:22 -0500 Here's one fact: Only artists who get airplay will receive the royalty. There is nothing in the RIAA's law that requires radio to play independent artists or independent labels. The only people who will receive the royalty are the same multi-millionaires who've been receiving free airplay for years. The rich get richer, and the poor go hungry. The royalty will mean the labels will only sign the kinds of artists who make the more commercial music that radio will play. That's bad for artists, because their creativity will be stiffled. It also means that payola will increase, because every spin will mean actual revenue for the labels. So the royalty will hurt creativity and increase crime. Radio News Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:48:14 -0500 We can have this argument till we're all blue in the face. The bottom line broadcast radio needs to create it's own royality-free music labels, we need to shun their "superstars" let them buy time on our stations if they want to sell a concert or play one of their songs. We already pay BMI, ASCAP, SESAC so we can have our royality-free artists record any song and we can make our own superstars. Radio Broadcasters don't need them, the record companies need us...let's show them how it's done once and for all and get to work on creating our royalty-free line-up of performers now and be pro-active. Radio News Sat, 27 Feb 2010 19:48:50 -0500 Well this is interesting. As a Musician thats not professional yet I'm not sure how I feel about this 5000.00 a year is like a spec of dust to a radio station, come on they get like 500.00 for 5 tiny little spots on a weekend. Its a two way street. No music, nobody wants to hear your radio station. I would want to know what portion of money goes to the artist as I do feel internet has short changed many artist but has also promoted others. I think the answer would probably be a vote by a majority of artist and see how they feel. Lets face it though radio is making money off someone else's hard work. It takes allot of years to become a great musician. Maybe if compensation isn't paid some sort of promotion of each artist is in order ya know maybe just talk about their music, history or something but I do think and artist should have a minimum control over how there name and music is used. Radio News Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:46:20 -0500 What led me to this website was the ad that is running on one of our local radio stations. It sounded odd because it talks about imposing a tax that will benefit "giant record companies". Taxes that benefit private companies? After looking into it I see that it isn't a tax, but royalty payments. Perhaps broadcasters have a legitimate complaint regarding the proposed royalties, but you are essentially lying to the public in describing the issue as "another bailout" or "more taxes". The broadcasters have lost credibility with me.