RIAA Wants Artist Royalties Lowered

laughingcoyote writes "The RIAA has asked the panel of federal government Copyright Royalty Judges to lower royalties paid to publishers and songwriters. They're specifically after digital recordings, and uses like cell phone ringtones. They say that the rates (which were placed in 1981) don't apply the same way to new technologies." From the article: "According to The Hollywood Reporter, the RIAA maintains that in the modern period when piracy began devastating the record industry profits to publishers from sales of ringtones and other 'innovative services' grew dramatically. Record industry executives believe this to be cause to advocate reducing the royalties paid to the artists who wrote the original music."

RIAA - Recent PR rundown

[curebox]

12/08/06: Warner CEO slaps own child on wrist [tinymixtapes.com]
11/28/06: Pressure on AllofMp3 [techdirt.com]
11/22/06: Pressure on the RIAA [weblogsinc.com]

RIAA does *not* represent artists

[JoostSchuttelaar]

when the RIAA claims to do anything in the future for the sake of artists.

The Recording Industry Association of America represents the recording industry, like record labels and distributors, not artists.

Re:WTF?

[advocate_one]

So, we officially need to find a replacement word for the first A in RIAA, because it doesn't standa for Artists anymore. I suggest something like this:

It never stood for "Artists" in the first place... It for "association"... as in "Record Industry Association of America" [riaa.com]

Follow the link and be amazed... the Artists DO NOT feature in the RIAA's thoughts at all, they're only concern is for the publishing rights holders as in the publishers, not the artists.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Its mission is to foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members' creative and financial vitality. Its members are the record companies that comprise the most vibrant national music industry in the world. RIAA members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States.

Oblig. article links

[Knuckles]

They are not working for the artists as we all know, but this is a compelling argument detached from the copyright infringement case.

Just to add to this, here are articles by different artists about being ripped off:

Steve Albini [negativland.com]
Courtney Love [salon.com]
Steve Vai [vai.com]

Re:RIAA does *not* represent artists

[Stormwatch]

The artists also depend on their reputations, which are damaged by the inferior quality of pirated copies sold to the public.

Bullshit. If I buy a pirated CD and it skips, I know it's because the pirate didn't use a good blank, or burned it too fast; if I download an MP3 and it sounds tinny or muffled, I know it's because it was poorly compressed; but if I go to a store, buy a CD, and it doesn't work on some players, can't be ripped, or infects my computer with malware... now THAT is sure to make one stop buying legit CDs completely!

Mechanical Royalties != Artist Royalties

[VoxCombo]

The article headline is wrong. Artist royalties are paid by record labels to recording artists for use of their recordings.

The article is referring to MECHANICAL ROYALTIES which are paid to SONGWRITERS for use of their songs. While the songwriter and artist are often the same, this is not always the case

EXAMPLE: Joe Schmoe writes a song that is recorded by Britney Spears for her new album. Britney Spears gets paid artist royalties by the record label. Joe Schmoe get paid mechanical royalties by the label.

The article is talking about reducing Joe Schmoe's royalties

Re:RIAA does *not* represent artists

[Ostsol]

Reminds me of this: "Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representative who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions."

Re:the record labels can also drop the RIAA

[John Hasler]

> if the RIAA is not going to pay the old kinds of royalties, there is no reason
> the record labels can not walk away. they could form a new organization or
> figure out some other method of making their money. the RIAA and the labels
> have a symbiotic relationship though.

You aren't making any sense. The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) pays no royalties. It is the record industry trade group. The labels are the members and it does exactly what they tell it to.

Re:Royalities on ring tones???? WTF

[John Hasler]

> Seriously, it may just barely step over the copyright line by linke three
> notes of something BUT there is the fair use clause.

Please read up on what fair use actually is. Ringtones would never qualify.

No, no, it's about the Harry Fox Agency

[Animats]

This is part of an ongoing dispute between the Harry Fox Agency [harryfox.com], the RIAA, and the ringtone industry over compulsory licenses.

The recording industry in the US has a statutory deal in the Copyright Act which allows them to re-record previously published songs (i.e. issue "cover albums") by paying a fixed royalty determined by Congress and the Librarian of Congress. This is called a "compulsory license". Most music publishers are represented by the Harry Fox Agency, which actually issues the "compulsory license" on request and collects and redistributes the royalties.

Then came ringtones. The Harry Fox Agency, in 2004, took the position that the compulsory license required by law does not cover ringtones. [harryfox.com] This was a bogus position, and on October 16, 2006, the Registrar of Copyrights ruled that ringtones are subject to the compulsory license [cll.com]. The Harry Fox Agency is taking this badly; "This decision has no effect on HFA's existing policy that DPD licenses ... do not cover ... ringtones or mastertones. [harryfox.com] The RIAA is sueing them, and HFA is probably going to lose this one.

This is really a very obscure issue even in the music industry. In the end, ringtones might get cheaper, and we may see the end of that silly distinction in the cellphone world between downloaded tracks and ringtones.

Re:Not likley

[enharmonix]

And at $15 CD, much more for DVD, I question how much the artist actually gets.

Read this essay by Steve Albini [negativland.com], a producer with Sub Pop (the guy who produced Nirvana), for a typical breakdown of the numbers. It's depressing...

Third major instance

[Quila]

This is the third major recent instance I can remember.

First was having a congressional staffer slip a clause into an unrelated bill that would have made the work of the musicians classified as a "work for hire," which would mean the record labels get the copyright to the music. After this was outed and some stars complained, the RIAA said "Oops, how did that get in there, we are working with Congress to restore the rights of the artists." The RIAA of course hired that staffer for a fat paycheck.

The second was holding back royalties, hiding behind complex accounting so the musicians wouldn't find out. Imagine some 70s musician who is probably owed an unknown amount of royalties, but it would take a $10,000 audit (that he has to pay for) to find out. NY AG Eliot Spitzer nailed them on this, and they owed millions in back royalties.

Performer != Artist

[dema]

In your example Joe Schmoe is an ARTIST while Britney Spears is a PERFORMER. So, yes, the RIAA is trying to screw ARTISTS even more than they do now.

Re:This could be a good thing

[SanityInAnarchy]

Just think one day the artists and the fans might connect directly on the internet with no middle man in between to screw the artists and sue the fans.

There are a few artists that do [rimbosity.com] that [audiobody.com], but really, what we need is a middleman [magnatune.com] (or two [mindawn.com]) that doesn't screw the artists and sue the fans. Take a good, hard look at MagnaTune [magnatune.com] -- even if you pay the lowest possible price ($5/album), 50% of it goes straight to the artist (and $2.50 is more than the RIAA will pay them), and you are legally allowed to share it with 5 people. You get to listen to the whole thing in mp3 before you buy, and you can download the whole thing in FLAC once you do pay for it. (FLAC is lossless, so you can burn it straight to CD as if you'd bought it at the music store, only it probably cost you less, and you know the artist got more.)

Start supporting these guys now. They might not have the bands you like now, but you'll find music to like, and you won't be supporting the RIAA. Get even your non-techie friends doing this, and soon enough, we could actually make the RIAA irrelevant.