Briefing dates set in Internet Radio Royalty Controversy
We covered this issue in some detail in the past, with a good deal of discussion taking place in the comments (here and here). The issue seems to have slipped off the radar lately, but the debate continues in the background.
Just recently, the US Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia set dates for briefings related to appeals filed by webcasting groups unhappy with the rates set by the Copyright Royalty Board for internet radio royalties. Briefs are due February 25 (2008) for the webcasters, April 25 for the CRB, and May 15 for SoundExchange. Reply briefs will be due on June 12. The court has yet to schedule oral arguments in the case.
With a summer break for the court and the length of process involved in a case like this, it is likely we won’t a see a decision until late 2008 at the earliest.
There has been at least one settlement announced, concerning the case, at this time. The settlement limits the minimum fee for multiple channels (streams) to $50,000 per company. This is welcome relief for businesses such as Pandora that allow each individual listener to create their own channel, resulting in millions of channels for which they would have been charged under the initial CRB decision.
It is possible that other settlements could be reached outside of court, rendering theses appeals unnecessary. Barring that, it looks to be a year or more before this issue is settled. In the meantime, be sure to visit your favorite bluegrass internet radio station and enjoy the music.
Email This Post
| Print | Top | 0 Comments
With controversy and legal action still taking place over the rates set for internet radio, the Copyright Royalty Board has fixed new rates for satellite radio services. Since there are only two satellite providers in the US, Sirius and XM are the only companies affected by the ruling.
The two satellite...
The topic of the newly reconstituted royalty rates for cybercasting - Internet radio - has been covered here on The Bluegrass Blog a good bit, and generated some discussion in the reader comments to one of these posts as well.
For those with an interest in following this story, and what these new...
We've followed the news of the CRB's recent copyright royalty decision very closely here on The Bluegrass Blog. You can read those posts in the related posts link section at the bottom of the post.
The new fee structure was opposed by most all webcasters and a petition was put before the board to...
With the July 15th deadline for the new internet radio royalties fast approaching, webcasters were starting to despair. But they are breathing easier today. Yesterday, at a congressional hearing, Jon Simson (executive director) of SoundExchange promised that the new rates would not be enforced (report...
We have posted a number of times in the past few months about the new royalty rates for Internet radio established by the US Copyright Royalty Board. These new rates represent a dramatic increase in the royalties owed to both songwriters and performers for Internet music broadcasts, with artists welcoming...
Hal Ponder, the Legislative Director for the American Federation of Musicians (AFM), circulated a message by email yesterday to the union membership with regard to the brewing controversy over the recent Copyright Royalty Board rate structure.
It presents the union's take on the rate increase, which...
In the ongoing debate over the new CRB royalty rates, small webcasters were granted a reprieve yesterday when SoundExchange announced an offer for small webcasters. This offer extends the previous agreement, Small Webcaster Settlement Act, under which the small webcasters have operated since 2002, through...
Leave a comment
Comments are open and unmoderated for our registered users, only your first comment will require approval before publication. Comments do not necessarily reflect the views of The Bluegrass Blog. Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by The Bluegrass Blog.
You must