What's up with the RIAA?

[audiogirl]

Time for a little radio-activism.<P>As I write this, I'm wondering if the government will one day require me to pay Webster's dictionary for each word I use. <P>People, before your right to e-mail is revoked, please let the copyright office and your representatives know how you feel about this proposal that will kill internet radio.

[barfle]

Absolutely, Jennifer. I agree, and have already sent an email from each of the four email addresses I have. Everyone please send as many messages as you can.<P>The quality of writing on this board is generally excellent, I believe we have several articulate spokespersons who can clearly state the case for rejecting the RIAA's suggestion.<P>Vote early, vote often!

[BenMurphy6]

RIAA is as bad as the MPAA...neither of these organizations has any idea of what their real mission is. they harm, rather than help, their respective industries and don't even realize it. they're driven by money (which i know is inevitable) and not by the art forms, without which they would not even exist.<p>[ 02-28-2002: Message edited by: BenMurphy6 ]

[ellenhrpro]

I agree about RIAA. I once worked for a small independent CD manufacturer. RIAA charged them with knowingly manufacturing bootleg CDs. They had no way of knowing if a customer's tapes were legitimate or not. After several years of litigation they settled for a confidential amount of money and were forced to hire a full time person who did nothing but try to determine whether or not the customer's music was legitimate. Today, most of the employees have been laid off and the plant is on the verge of closing. I always thought that RIAA was fueled by the SONY's of the world who wanted to put the small independents out of business. Now it looks like they are out to get internet radio.

[Sarcyn]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by audiogirl:<BR><STRONG>Time for a little radio-activism.<P>As I write this, I'm wondering if the government will one day require me to pay Webster's dictionary for each word I use. <P>People, before your right to e-mail is revoked, please let the copyright office and your representatives know how you feel about this proposal that will kill internet radio.</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hi,<BR>I sent the following to the Copyright Bureaucrats:<BR>"PLEASE DO NOT KILL INTERNET RADIO!<BR> <BR>The Internet radio has a very important function. In many places, the choice of radio stations on the air is very poor and limited, and the possibility to listen over Internet has considerably improved the situation in such areas. I suppose that you, probably living in Washington area, do not think about such things very deeply, but for many others it is very important! Also, it makes America reach shorter with information and viewpoints: if the american internet radio stations are closed, emissions from other countries will take over. I fear that the quality will be inferior, and that anti-american attitudes will be more widely spread."<BR> <BR>I will give some further comments to this:<BR> <BR>Copy-right issues concerning music and TV are up for re-evaluation, and the industry will be able to take care of itself, without having to recurse to rigid out-dated copyright laws. Let the industry find its ways without hurting American interests, they are fully capable of this!<BR>Lave Fischer"<BR> <BR>There are many good arguments not to support the rich media industry in their struggle against the development, and I think that you should present some, not just your own survival!!!<BR>a. The rich industry is fighting a loosing battle for outdated copyright rules, that cannot be upheld when conditions have changed so dramatically. To try to uphold them will just delay the necessary change in the industry.<BR>b. Any attempt to "punish" transfer of music or films over the internet will just transfer the activity to other countries, and diminish the American voice in the world,<BR>c. Internet has made very much to even out the differences in the cultural environment between densely populated areas and countryside. Trying to curb the emissions over the Net, or to control the Net, will strike hardest against already culturally handicapped rural areas.<BR>d. As usual, rigid bureaucrats, putting their cold hand over developping technologies, gives other countries, with less red tape, an advantage in technology and expreinece of how it can be used. It may be impossible for America to recover lost ground.<BR>e. The argument that artists and publishers must be paid to get an incentive to produce, is not just. In the present situation, artists, record companies, film makers (and software producers) earn much more than necessary, and they will find other ways to earn their money. Maybe they will not earn as much, but certainly enough to continue to florish (which is of course important). Do not curb broadcasting and copying, that has a very important function!<BR> <BR>So, taking a stand for the rich against the less rich (you are probably not poor, though), authorities will do America and americans a major disservice.<BR>Regards,<BR>Sarcyn

[barfle]

What's really annoying about all this heel-dragging on the part of the RIAA and their supposed clients is that they are trying to protect something that really can't be protected, and the fact that it can't is actually a good thing, both for the recording industry and the general public. History proves this out.<P>I'm old enough to remember when there weren't any VCRs, and several broadcasters and film studios filed a HUGE lawsuit against Sony because they were manufacturing a device that could copy TV programs. The broadcasters thought this would cut into their profits. Well, Sony won and the film studios and broadcasters made more money from video tapes than they ever believed. These days, many films go directly to video without having ever been seen in theaters. ALL the revenue from those films comes from the feared and loathed video cassettes. As I recall, there was also an effort made to kill audio cassettes, because they made copying of records too easy.<P>Let's make it clear, I am an advocate for what's called Intellectual Property, and I'm one of those Washington, DC bureaucrats. I believe that when someone thinks up a new idea, whether it be a song, a film, or a widget, they are entitled to reap the rewards of their unique efforts. However, the path they seem to be heading down sure looks like one that was tried before, and found wanting. The entertainment industry has already tried to shoot themselves in the foot, then in the knee, and now they seem to be taking aim at the groin. :confused:<p>[ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: barfle ]

[dkm32]

This is what I sent:<P>Regarding the raising of fees that would in effect shut down most, if not all Internet Radio Stations, I would like you to consider why I listen to the Internet.<P>I live in a very rural area. It is surrounded by hills. Standard radio signals do not reach my home at all. Internet Radio is the ONLY radio I can get.<P>I work in a very industrial area. All the industrial (electronic) noise interferes with standard radio signals. Again, Internet Radio is the ONLY radio I can get in my office.<P>Finally, the once proud Classical Music Station for San Diego is no more. We have a weak station that cannot be heard beyond a few miles of its base. The Internet's Beethoven Radio is the ONLY Classical Radio station available through out the county.<P>I understand that the music industry deserves to make money. But, please, let it make money with low fees and large volume instead of the reverse. The large volume of sales possible with the exposure of Internet Radio should make up for any high fees to play the music. PLEASE DO NOT KILL INTERNET RADIO!

[EricMichaels]

For more background information on this issue, and to see what other webcasters are doing about it, visit this new site: <A HREF="http://www.saveinternetradio.org" TARGET=_blank>http://www.saveinternetradio.org</A> <BR>It's going to take a couple of days for the new URL to take, so you can find it here for now: <A HREF="http://208.3.135.80/" TARGET=_blank>http://208.3.135.80/</A> <P>Thank you everyone for making a difference!<P> Eric

[lifesaver]

I too have submitted e-mails from several e-amil accounts. Even though I live in a culturally-diverse city, Atlanta GA, the classical radio station here loves to air their news, NPR, etc throughout the times that I actually listen to the radio. Furthermore, they would probably have a heart attack if someone called in with a request!<P>Beethoven.com needs to be kept on the air as a preventative precaution for all of us that are still sane! There is nothing better than a double shot of Oban scotch in the evenings while listening Beethoven.com!

[FLZapped]

Well, I just wrote all of my congressmen and the president. I have found a quick way to do this in pretty much one shot. Go to the following URL, which will give you the ability to lookup all your representatives at once to email them:<BR> <A HREF="http://capwiz.com/liberty/dbq/officials/" TARGET=_blank>http://capwiz.com/liberty/dbq/officials/</A> <P>You just need to enter your zip +4 code and they will all pop right up with the ability to email them in one shot.<P>Good Luck everyone, I hope we can crush this silliness.<P>-Bruce

[dkm32]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FLZapped:<BR><STRONG>I have found a quick way to do this in pretty much one shot. Go to the following URL, which will give you the ability to lookup all your representatives at once to email them:<BR> <A HREF="http://capwiz.com/liberty/dbq/officials/" TARGET=_blank>http://capwiz.com/liberty/dbq/officials/</A></STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I tried this website, I got e-mail from my two state Senators that they are unable to access e-mail sent from this site. They are only set up to get e-mail sent directly from their own website.

[FLZapped]

"I tried this website, I got e-mail from my two state Senators that they are unable to access e-mail sent from this site. They are only set up to get e-mail sent directly from their own website. "<P>How self-serving can you get! Oh well, I assume you still got through. Something tells me it's time for new faces in those offices.<BR> <P>-Bruce

[barfle]

I just got the following email from "Copyright Information"<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>We are responding to your recent communication regarding the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel (“CARP”) report delivered on February 20, 2002. That report recommends rates and terms for the statutory license for eligible nonsubscription services to perform sound recordings publicly by means of digital audio transmissions (“webcasting”) under 17 U.S.C. §114 and to make ephemeral recordings of sound recordings for use of sound recordings under the statutory license set forth in 17 U.S.C. §112. <P>The proposed rates and terms for webcasters operating under a statutory license announced on February 20, 2002, are the recommendations made by a panel of three independent arbitrators. The Panel made its recommendations after a six-month hearing. During this period, webcasters, broadcasters and copyright owners offered evidence for what the appropriate rates and terms should be for the public performance of a sound recording over the Internet. At the conclusion of this process, the Panel submitted its recommendations and a report explaining its rationale for the recommendations to the Copyright Office. <P>The public version of the panel’s report has been posted to the Copyright Office website.<BR>The panel’s recommendations are now being reviewed. Under the law, only parties to the proceeding may request that the panel’s recommendations be modified or set aside. These comments will be carefully considered during the review process. There is, however, no provision in the law for comments from the general public. A final determination as to the rates and terms will be made when the review process is completed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>"No provision in the law for comments from the general public." Bureaucracy has definitely run amok. Maybe we've hit them with a lot of opinions and maybe that'll sway them, but it looks like they are officialy deaf.

[Kevin]

We and other webcasters thank you all for your support in our efforts to effect positive change in the copyright laws. I should tell you, however, that although your emails may not be all read by the copyright office, we are putting them into printed form and delivering them to Washington to ensure your voice is heard.<P>Also, we are working with the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), as well as the House Committee on the Judiciary to find ways to solve this issue.<P>We will keep everyone informed of developments on our website and on Beethoven Radio.<P>Keep it up! With your help, we'll be around for many years to come!<P>Sincerely,

[Frank Eggers]

I think that Internet radio is a very excellent idea. Here in Fiji (I retired here from San Diego, CA, in 1994), instrumental music is unknown accept to accompany vocal music. Unfortunately, Internet radio doesn't work well here since the Internet is inordinately slow and Internet Services Fiji has a monlpoly.<P>It would help if CD prices were lower. It actually costs less to make a CD than a cassette, so it is unclear why CDs cost more.<P>Perhaps the declining interest in classical music is the result if inadequate music appreciation courses in schools.

[superich]

I have e-mailed all my representatives and the president. I will also follow up with a regular snail mail letter on the CARP issue. I hope you all do the same because I feel a regular letter has more impact and they can not just hit the delete key.