SAVE BEETHOVEN RADIO!!!

Chat with other listeners of the Nicole Marie show here!
-- On the Air from 8 AM - 1 PM

Moderator: Nicole Marie

Postby bignaf » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:15 pm

Nicole Marie wrote:
jamiebk wrote:
bignaf wrote:the RIAA royalties might make me money in the future, so I won't sign the petition, but I won't mind anyone else signing this petition.


You may find that there is no one left to air the music for which you could be paid


Well said Jamie. We want to pay royalities but we think it should be the same rate already established for AM and FM stations. (We pay one rate for the Am signal in Hartford and a second for the dot com.) We do believe artists should be paid but it should be the rate already set. We will have to pay 100% over our revenue. We will have to shut down so bignf sorry but you will get nothing at then end of it. Plus you don't even see the correct amount. RIAA keeps most of it and little makes it to the artists. You may want to send them a letter.

it is still a bad idea, politically, for me to sign it.
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby Trumpetmaster » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:35 pm

I'm #6184
Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.
Trumpetmaster
Patron
 
Posts: 11557
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Postby hal 9000 » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:39 pm

bignaf wrote:it is still a bad idea, politically, for me to sign it.


Well, when B.com has to shutdown because they can no longer afford to pay the royalties required to broadcast music, at least I'll be comforted in knowing that you might be making more money from it.

:x
Gentleman! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!
hal 9000
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Gainesville, FL

Postby Trumpetmaster » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:43 pm

hal 9000 wrote:
bignaf wrote:it is still a bad idea, politically, for me to sign it.


Well, when B.com has to shutdown because they can no longer afford to pay the royalties required to broadcast music, at least I'll be comforted in knowing that you might be making more money from it.

:x



Didn't H.R.H. say a few posts back that no $$$ would be paid since
the music would not be paid....

All parties lose out here...................
Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.
Trumpetmaster
Patron
 
Posts: 11557
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Postby Shapley » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:47 pm

I think what Bignaf is saying is that he may not agree with them on this issue, but he doesn't want to cross the RIAA. He doesn't want to bite the hand that may feed him.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby Catmando » Thu Mar 08, 2007 1:09 pm

Shapley wrote:I think what Bignaf is saying is that he may not agree with them on this issue, but he doesn't want to cross the RIAA. He doesn't want to bite the hand that may feed him.


Internet Radio provides world wide exposure to artists that they probably might not get through other mediums.

The RIAA are hurting the artists by going ahead with this.

There are many artists I had never heard of until I came listening to Beethoven Radio.....

Darren Skanson is an example (he gets alot of airplay on Beethoven Radio), and is a BBB member also.
Catmando
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:01 am

Postby hal 9000 » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:07 pm

Shapley wrote:I think what Bignaf is saying is that he may not agree with them on this issue, but he doesn't want to cross the RIAA. He doesn't want to bite the hand that may feed him.


Yes, I understood it as that as well, but I still don't like it. Don't get me wrong though: It is not bignaf that I do not like, it is his decision. It, of course, is his to make and even if he signed the petition, that would not ensure that the RIAA's new royalty regulation will be repealed. But I would not forsake B.com, a station I have enjoyed for almost 5 years now, just because I might make some money from it. There are many hands that feed, and this particular hand is so big that it probably wouldn't even notice. Heck, I'd be pretty durn concerned about dealing with it if it did notice, especially so if it blacklisted me afterwards. But perhaps that is just me.

:roll:
Gentleman! You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!
hal 9000
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Gainesville, FL

Postby Catmando » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:15 pm

Just from a strictly and purely economic view point, RIAA's increase does not make sense.
Catmando
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:01 am

Postby Shapley » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:36 pm

Just from a strictly and purely economic view point, RIAA's increase does not make sense.


I don't think it's purely about revenue, it's about controlling competition. Internet transmission is seen as a threat to other forms of broadcast and music sales. This is a short-sighted attempt to prevent or delay an unavoidable market shift or at least, as Nicole points out, to ensure that certain corporate interests control it.

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby analog » Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:06 pm

I believe:
This is a continuation of media consolidation. The architects of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 failed to realize that the internet would become a second aether. Woody Tanger and a few others did, and started internet broadcasting. Now the broadcast industrialists realize they missed the boat again, just like they did with FM radio before WW2.
So RIAA is doing exactly what RCA did then and Walmart is accused of now, stomping out the Mom & Pop operations for profit.

Walmart at least brings economy of scale to us small town folks.
But what benefit will we get when RIAA secures internet broadcasting for a few congloerates?

It'd make a good conspiracy movie. Hollywood updated "Manchurian Candidate" and changed the bad guys, why not do "Seven Days in May" too?

a.
Cogito ergo doleo.
analog
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:01 am
Location: arkansas ozarks

Postby bignaf » Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:50 pm

hal 9000 wrote:
Shapley wrote:I think what Bignaf is saying is that he may not agree with them on this issue, but he doesn't want to cross the RIAA. He doesn't want to bite the hand that may feed him.


Yes, I understood it as that as well, but I still don't like it. Don't get me wrong though: It is not bignaf that I do not like, it is his decision. It, of course, is his to make and even if he signed the petition, that would not ensure that the RIAA's new royalty regulation will be repealed. But I would not forsake B.com, a station I have enjoyed for almost 5 years now, just because I might make some money from it. There are many hands that feed, and this particular hand is so big that it probably wouldn't even notice. Heck, I'd be pretty durn concerned about dealing with it if it did notice, especially so if it blacklisted me afterwards. But perhaps that is just me.

:roll:

Shapley interpreted me correctly.
Hal I never listen to B.com, so there might be a difference there in why I don't feel like I'm forsaking them. I give them as much revenue as almost anyone here, by viewing and clicking on ads. I cost them much less than most here because I don't use the bandwidth-intensive stream.

another reason is that I did no individual research on this issue. I see no reason for me to take HRH's word on this issue more than the RIAA's, they are both interested parties.
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby barfle » Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:16 pm

bignaf wrote:another reason is that I did no individual research on this issue.

As a musician, I believe it would be a good idea to do that research, to see exactly how they want to control how you will make money, assuming you intend to record.

I was number 7523, according to the email they sent me.
--I know what I like--
barfle
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Springfield, Vahjinyah, USA

Postby bignaf » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:23 pm

barfle wrote:
bignaf wrote:another reason is that I did no individual research on this issue.

As a musician, I believe it would be a good idea to do that research, to see exactly how they want to control how you will make money, assuming you intend to record.

I was number 7523, according to the email they sent me.


I'm reffering to researching this particular matter, as to whether they are being outrageuos in raising the rate, or whether internet radio has been taking advantage of artists. I;m not going to research it because i wouldn't sign it anyway. the main point in my original comment was to remind you that there are two sides to every dispute.
We've had a session with an ASCAP exec, and I did individual research re: the royalties that are likely to concern me in the near future.
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby bignaf » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:40 pm

OK, I did the research. the RIAA are not my people. and experts in the field seem to think this is unsustainable so I guess I should sign the petition, even though I never listen to internet radio, and even though the website uses the annoying liberal cliche of pretending to be david v. Goliath when it's actually two Goliaths fighting.
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby Trumpetmaster » Fri Mar 09, 2007 7:05 am

analog wrote:I believe:
This is a continuation of media consolidation. The architects of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 failed to realize that the internet would become a second aether. Woody Tanger and a few others did, and started internet broadcasting. Now the broadcast industrialists realize they missed the boat again, just like they did with FM radio before WW2.
So RIAA is doing exactly what RCA did then and Walmart is accused of now, stomping out the Mom & Pop operations for profit.

Walmart at least brings economy of scale to us small town folks.
But what benefit will we get when RIAA secures internet broadcasting for a few congloerates?

It'd make a good conspiracy movie. Hollywood updated "Manchurian Candidate" and changed the bad guys, why not do "Seven Days in May" too?

a.



Analog,
You open a big can of worms here with the Telecom act....

The VOIP industry is not regulated where the traditional wire line telephone service is.... (I worked many years in the old traditional wire line industry and the past 3-4 years in VOIP)

There are numerous efforts going on to regulate VOIP as
traditional telecom rules are not being adhered to. Just like the old
Wild West.....

What I do not understand is why they would put the price higher
for Internet Radio.

It is definitely an obvious manuever for control...

Oh.. I answered my own question.....

TM
Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it.
Trumpetmaster
Patron
 
Posts: 11557
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Postby Serenity » Sun Mar 11, 2007 12:59 am

Trumpetmaster wrote:I'm #6184


14,502 here. It's been about 60 hours since TMs number. That's about 138 petitions per hour.

This news flash was disconcerting to me. The rates appear extremely exaggerated and unfair (compared to other media). I don't understand how the CRB decided these rates. I gave up after skimming up to page 22 of 154 pages of their PDF file. Free the market! Eliminate all these rules and regulations that just bog down the will of people to conduct business with each other.

I saw that MA Rep D-Martin Meehan brought the issue up at the House of Representatives.

Maybe Beethoven Radio should emigrate: Canada? Europe? I wonder how other stations operate in other countries in comparison. If the station caters to listeners around the world then International Laws should apply instead. If the USA accounts for 25% of listeners, then rates should only apply to 25% of listeners besides the fact that the rates seem outrageous. That way, if the CRB caters to greed, then the station can decide "Oh well! I guess we won't be transmitting to the USA, just the rest of the world." I wouldn't want that! But, hey, at least the station would have more say in the fate of their business.

The RIAA is just another special interest lobbyist. If it were not for Beethoven Radio (including their programming, commercial options and bulletin board), I would be less knowledgeable and less interested in classical music and I would not buy the music. Everyone involved in producing a particular CD would just go sell elsewhere. I would then be forced to get my music via the blackmarket and settle for low quality, pirate copies.
Serenity
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4666
Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 12:01 am

Postby bignaf » Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:21 pm

there are more than one petition on this matter. so the total number may be much higher than 14,000.
I saw a different petiotion against the new rates at a white supremacist web radio site... (just reminding you that the beating the new rates will help the good with the evil...)
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby Nicole Marie » Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:24 am

Hello Serenity-

In other countries they do not have this issue. Royalties are paid but the rate is reasonable. The understanding is that radio is a promotional tool to help get the artist out to the public so why punish the radio stations? US record labels have tried to get rates in Europe and Asia increased for American artists but there are strict rules already in place and the US record lables were rejected on already established trade and monopoly laws. We broadcast in Germany through a cell phone provider. Listeners can hear us on their phone through this service. We pay little in royalties and the response from fans and labels has been positive in Germany. The service is expanding through Europe - my family in Italy listens! It's pretty exciting. We have toyed with moving the servers to Canada or Europe... I'll move! :scooter:

The law says where the servers are based means you follow those laws. We are in Hartford so we have to follow US law. The location of the majority of your audience does not matter. Plus in the overnight the majority for us is Asia and Europe, then the US, Canada and South America (mainly Brazil) comes in during our daytime. We could still broadcast out of Hartford but move the servers to Toronto and then have to follow Canadian law. So there are options...
H.R.H. Nicole Marie
Eve was Framed
Nicole Marie
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1843
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Hartford CT

Postby Catmando » Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:40 am

Nicole Marie wrote:We could still broadcast out of Hartford but move the servers to Toronto and then have to follow Canadian law. So there are options...


Well, if all else fails, bring the servers to Canada! :owned:
Catmando
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:01 am

Postby navneeth » Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:29 am

And before Bach's Lunch we'd hear O Canada? :lol:
Navneeth

Check out the History of the 30Q Game
navneeth
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Madras, India

PreviousNext

Return to Nicole Marie

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron