Update on Webcasting Royalty Controversy

After a flurry of renegotiations, arguments, Congressional wrist-slapping, and a lot of steam blowing, webcasting's D-Day (July 15) has passed. A low fog still hangs, and for many webcasters, the future is still up in question.

Late last week, as the new webcasting royalty fee schedule approached, outcry from webcasters, the listening public, and Congress sparked another round of negotiations with SoundExchange, the company that collects and distributes webcasting royalties. The minimum per-channel fee that threatened services like Pandora, Live365, and Rhapsody was rescinded. SoundExchange also promised not to take immediate legal action against webcasters who were still in negotiations. But in the meantime, the threat of large looming royalty payments has silenced some small webcasters.

Although NPR's request for a court-ordered stay on the new rates was denied, they have filed a formal court appeal, but hearings may not happen for another year or two. On Thursday, members of Congress introduced a bill postponing the new webcasting rates for another 60 days, but this failed to pass in time for the July 15 deadline.

So what does this mean for WFMU? While the details of SoundExchange's new webcasting rates for non-commercial stations are still unclear, WFMU will continue streaming. We hope that NPR and SoundExchange continue negotiating fair terms for public stations in the coming weeks. If that falls through, there's always the possibility of Congressional intervention (the Internet Radio Equality Act, more info at savenetradio.org), or an appeals hearing in the distant future. With luck, WFMU won't ever have to place a cap on our online audience.

Comments

[Chris]

Remember pirate radio? All webcasters should unite and just say NO WAY, WE WON'T PAY. Heck, they can't sue everyone. Do it in protest. Do this as a way of saying BITE ME! They have already turned commercial radio into such unbelievable slop! Piss on 'em. You guys should all unite into a union, as it were, and just don't pay these greedy pigs one red cent. ---end of rant---

[norelpref]

I would look at this as a great opportunity to feature Independent artists and promote creative commons type approaches to "copyright." As Chris mentioned, commercial radio is shite anyway. The time for a revolution is now. Shit, we should be celebrating. If you listen carefully you can hear the last gasps of old world media dinosaurs dying.

[Rufus]

I'm glad that things are still moving and WFMU is still on my compy. I called my people and I hope it made the teeniest bit of difference.

[chime]

Liz, is NPR representing WFMU in ongoing negotiations? If not, who is? My concern is that NPR is going to cut a deal for NPR member stations and independents will be left on their own to negotiate with SoundExchange. Unified seams to be the best way for all streamers to get a fair deal.

[Station Manager Ken]

Chime - NPR is not negotiating on behalf of non-NPR stations. We're also members of the intercollegiate broadcasting system (IBS) who is actively involved in negotiations with SoundExchange. But I don't have any expectation that anything SoundExchange agrees to will actually help us, or any other webcaster for that matter. This is why we are proactively seeking waivers from artists and record labels, an approach that's been very succesful for us. It's also why we're working hard to create the Free Music Archive, a free online music and sound library that SoundExchange will have no say over.

[Krys O.]

Intercollegiate Broadcasting System? I'm curious how the station can still be associated with that group if there is no college behind FMU. Ken? 'splain, please.

[Brian Collins]

Who needs the IBS when you have the IBJ?