• On MovieTome: First Look: Jessica Alba in 'Machete'!
July 7, 2009 12:50 PM PDT

Web radio, music industry reach agreement on royalties

by Greg Sandoval
  • Font size
  • Print
  • Post a comment

Tim Westergren

(Credit: CNET News)

Internet radio got a break Tuesday when the sector reached an agreement on streaming-music royalty rates with SoundExchange, the group that collects royalties on behalf of artists and labels.

The two sides announced the deal, which comes after more than two years of negotiations, political maneuvering, and fans pleading with lawmakers to save Webcasting. It should be noted, however, that Webcasters are still at a disadvantage when competing with traditional broadcast radio. Over-the-air stations aren't required to pay royalty rates to artists or labels.

Steve Marks, an executive vice president for the Recording Industry Association of America and one of the people who helped close the deal, said the settlement is proof that the music industry wants to partner with technology firms.

"Supporting new business models through innovative licensing agreements is critical to the future of our industry," Marks said. "We are pleased to have found an alternative in the hope of avoiding costly litigation in favor of building partnerships."

The agreement calls for large ad-supported radio services, such as Pandora, to either share 25 percent of revenue with the music industry or pay a per-stream rate of 0.08 cent retroactive to 2006, whichever is greater. That rate will increase until reaching 0.14 cent in 2015.

Sites that generate less than $1.25 million in revenue must pay 12 percent to 14 percent of sales for streaming rights.

Lower rates were vital to the survival of Internet radio stations, Tim Westergren, Pandora's founder, said in September. The Copyright Royalty Board set a performance rate at 0.19 cent but Webcasters argued that the rates would drive them out of business.

But here's the rub: Pandora's heaviest users will now have to pay, according to a story in the blog All Things Digital.

CNET News Poll

Saving Web radio
Will this deal be enough to keep sites like Pandora afloat?

Yes
No
It doesn't matter. I'll keep copying my music from file-sharing sites.



View results

Westergren told the blog that Pandora will begin charging listeners who use the service for 40 hours a month to pay $0.99 to hear more music after hitting that mark.

"There's a very small percent of listeners who are using it a ton," Westergren told the blog. "That's great, except when you're paying per song."

As for why Webcasters must pay these royalties and traditional broadcasters do not, that is at the center of a struggle going on now on Capitol Hill. The music industry is trying to get the Performance Rights Act passed in Congress, which would force over-the-air broadcasters to pay the fees, while the National Association of Broadcasters is pushing its own legislation designed to shield it from the royalties.

Dennis Wharton, an NAB spokesman, said that the Webcasters are subscription services that are trying to get people to pay, just as Pandora is doing now. He also says that traditional radio is a huge promotional tool for the major music labels and Web radio's following is still tiny.

"I think there is big recognition that the sheer number of people who listen to over-the-air radio generates a massive amount of revenue for the record labels and artists," Wharton said. "If you added up the competition, say Pandora, or Live365, we would dwarf them."

Greg Sandoval covers media and digital entertainment for CNET News. He is a former reporter for The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. E-mail Greg, or follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/sandoCNET.
Recent posts from Digital Media
Google Books settlement sets geographic, business limits
Medpedia to best the more democratic Wikipedia?
Running a contest on Facebook? That'll cost you
Google adds World Bank data to search results
iTunes music library makes its way to the browser
Convicted murderer sues Wikipedia under privacy law
Verizon tests sending RIAA copyright notices
Microsoft denies Windows 7 is based on Mac OS
by xav_sd July 7, 2009 1:34 PM PDT
No mention of non-profit radio stations, nor college radio. Would like to know how this agreement affects them. Thanks
Reply to this comment
by sandonet July 7, 2009 2:01 PM PDT
Xav_sd

I'm on it. I'll get that info if it exists. Give me 20 mins.
by dascha1 July 8, 2009 5:04 AM PDT
Yes, get on it. As I understand it from popular and unpopular votes freedom is for ALL these days:

http://www.copyright.gov/licensing/notice-use-2008-5-29.pdf

This list no doubt has most likely either grown or shrunk in 2009, or disappeared.
by dascha1 July 8, 2009 5:18 AM PDT
By golly it has grown (not shrunk) this year-

http://tinyurl.com/nmgcvp
by Random_Walk July 7, 2009 2:04 PM PDT
Agreed on what xav asked. Apparently, the RIAA cartel decided that they couldn't squeeze Internet Radio anymore, so they decided to start squeezing the terrestrial radio stations now... (most stations play an ad detailing some of what it's about).
Reply to this comment
by ibeetle July 7, 2009 2:13 PM PDT
This is the way you treat your customers. Tell them exactly what is happening. Tell them why it is happening, and finally give them the best possible price.

SiriusXM has to decided to just send out an email without any explanation that royalties have to be paid and starting immediately they will be. And screw the lowest possible price; instead they use it as a money grab and gouge the customer charging many more times the royalty rate.

Every month Sirius is losing listeners. And every months businesses like Pandora (and others) are gaining listeners... gee I wonder why.


Hey, FCC I understand you allowed SiriusXM to charge back to its customers the royalty rates; thats fine. But, why is it that they are charging $2.00 for rates that only cost them about $0.60?
Reply to this comment
by ddesy July 8, 2009 6:23 AM PDT
As you can tell, SiriusXM is desperate, that's why. They need to make a bigger profit since their programming quality is declining and customers are leaving.

I just canceled my subscription to Sirius, and within a week daily calls trying to get me back started. The first day I told them to not call me again, but it didn't matter.
by BigAl35540 July 23, 2009 12:39 AM PDT
Because the FCC, NAB and the ENTIRE radio industry are in bed with each other! The customer be damned! Profit is the ONLY focus! The FCC doesn't REGULATE like they were created to do, their sole purpose is to make radio station owner's wallets fatter! It's time to replace the FCC with an organization that regulates the industry That includes time off the air for maintenance mandatory like it used to be and enforce standards of sound quality. Maybe then FM radio station's would drop that disgusting Optimod device that butchers audio so horribly! Also maybe then we'd quit having overmodulated splattering stations on the band! Boy was that a STUPID DECISION to let Sirius and XM merge into one non-competitive entity! Competition is always good! That's why I listen to Shoutcast streams exclusively on the Internet now! Oh and Live365 and Pandora? NOBODY in their right mind is going to listen to them when you have to use their substandard proprietary push windowed players when you can tune in FAR SUPERIOR quality music and sound quality using Winamp or one of the other players and just get the music you want to hear in fabulous CD quality sound with NO COMMERCIAL INTERRUPTIONS EVER!! It's those guys who are threatened the most by this royalties thing! It's time to say NO to the RIAA, SoundExchange, the NAB and the FCC! We'll all be better off for it!
by Pete Bardo July 7, 2009 2:28 PM PDT
And I'm curious as to who gets the money, how is it split up? Who decides who gets the money? Bet you SoundExchange keeps most of it for administration? Further, I'd bet you that when my song gets streamed I will get nothing and someone else will get my 0.08 cents.
Reply to this comment
by lawsonmusicmedia July 7, 2009 3:18 PM PDT
Its still too high. Absurdly high and ridiculously difficult to manage the reporting requirements.
Reply to this comment
by Thozman July 7, 2009 4:30 PM PDT
Naa, this doesn't wash with me at all.
Any site that has the RIAA's hands in it can only mean trouble.

I'd rather listen to somebody plunkin on a rubberband then to give the RIAA one penny.
Reply to this comment
by martin_c_e July 7, 2009 6:04 PM PDT
I'm with the NAB. Streaming music services are ok; but one spends a lot a time listening to hear something new. HD2 radio stations improve on availability of specific tastes.

The music industry thinks sales are poor now; just wait until there are less stations to play music. I, for one, only buy music that I have heard. I have been burned too many times on albums with only one hit song.
Reply to this comment
by ddesy July 8, 2009 6:24 AM PDT
Looking for "hit" songs is your problem. I have yet to find a station that plays much more than the constant rehashing of the same pop sound that has been going for years now.
by BigAl35540 July 23, 2009 12:12 AM PDT
You at the NAB may be partially responsible for this: IN RADIO THE FOCUS HAS BECOME "ADVERTISING" AND NOT THE "FORMAT" ANYMORE!! I don't give a damn about they're "hawking", I don't need any of that stuff anyway! I'm interested in what they are playing! In most cases now that is "crap" by wanna be musicians who have no talent whatsoever! So I have "turned off" broadcast radio and am never coming back. I know what I like in music and I know EXACTLY which websites have what I want to hear! It's all music you don't hear on uncreative American radio! It's obvious you don't listen to REAL Internet radio otherwise you wouldn't have said what you said!
by ralfthedog July 7, 2009 7:33 PM PDT
What about bands that are not members of SoundExchange? Does SoundExchange charge for non SoundExchange bands? I have heard that an independent band that set up an internet radio station to only play their own songs would be charged. Is that true? Is this legal?

The last time I checked, SoundExchange was not the government.
Reply to this comment
by PixP July 7, 2009 9:08 PM PDT
RIAA is only settling with the ridiculous plan because it gives them more leverage when they go after over the air stations. They want to charge us for sound. What's next? They want to charge us for the air we breath, and what we smell?
Reply to this comment
by magicmaster July 8, 2009 1:35 AM PDT
If I never have chance to hear them, how do I suppose to them at all?
Reply to this comment
by July 8, 2009 4:23 AM PDT
My internet radio station, MGZC Radio (www.live365.com/stations/mgzcm) will obviously be impacted. With our creed being the "other" music, we try to help the lesser-known artists in downtempo/lounge/electronic/dance get a break.

It seems that the RIAA has no intention of helping the artists since most of the collected royalty money goes to the record companies and publishers who control most of the rights the artists have. The NAB should pay as well as they do the same thing we do as far as broadcasting is concerned.

A lot of commercial over-the-air-stations are pre-programmed for the day, week, month, etc., so they are similar to most internet radio stations as far daily operations go.

Great country, though. If you have the $$$ and the foot soldiers you can get what you want. Otherwise, enjoy the crumbs.
Reply to this comment
by C0mmanderB0nd July 8, 2009 10:58 AM PDT
XM/Sirius's move to pass along the cost was the final straw for me so I cancelled my subscription as well. Oddly enough I got a survey wondering why I left shorly after, and from the tone of the questions and how specific they were, XM is well aware of these tactics driving away customers.

As they specifically asked in reason for leaving if paying extra for online, best of, and increasing royalties were factors in my cancelling.

Of course with as desperate as they are for money I don't expect them to change, or be around in a few years for that matter.

As for radio I find it more annoying when compared to the ease of shuffling through my music library I compiled legally by ripping my 100's of previously purchased CD's. So suck it RIAA, I have already paid you enough..... Keep your popcrap radio feeding the insanity of drugged up marginally talented **********.
Reply to this comment
by FreddieT July 8, 2009 2:34 PM PDT
So stupid of NBA to consider Webcasters competitors instead of comrades. They should team up and fight the music industry so they will both be treated better instead of pursuing their own short-sighted benefit. Shame on NBA!
Reply to this comment
by phunkysmell July 8, 2009 7:58 PM PDT
FYI, this deal sets a MINIMUM $25,000 charge no matter what your revenues, so this completely outlaws the hobby station. It may be good for big sites like Pandora, but 95% of Shoutcast stations, etc. will be illegal or be gone.
Reply to this comment
by Thozman July 9, 2009 9:53 AM PDT
I don't see the difference in sitting at your home and playing your newest CD for a room full of friends, and/or using a device such as hobby internet radio to do the same.
As far a pirating goes, when one of my buds bought a cassette or CD, if any of us wanted a copy it was passed around for anyone who wanted it to copy or record.

It was just what good friends did.
Soon the RIAA will be suing people for playing their CD's within earshot range of others.
by BigAl35540 July 22, 2009 11:49 PM PDT
When that happens, it will be time to rise up and DESTROY the RIAA and SoundExchange by any means possible! That would mean full blown unadulterated war against them! I would not accept victory until until both were totally destroyed and unable to function! As far as I am concerned the RIAA, SoundExchange and the NAB are PUBLIC ENEMIIES NUMBER 1. They have one and only one motivation, PERSONAL GREED! It's time to say NO to the RIAA, SoundExchange and the NAB. They have become a liability and not an asset in the music industry! It's one of the reasons that the United States of America's music industry shovels out crap by untalented wanna be musician's! Until these entities are FORCED to change their way, this is all will ever get and the Internet MUST REMAIN the alternative to this AT ALL COSTS!
by BigAl35540 July 22, 2009 11:13 PM PDT
Live365 & Pandora? These sites simply put are LAME!!! Real internet radio is stations like Groove Salad, [SOMA-FM], Bluemars, Bluemars, Mixing of Particulate Solids 1-3, BUZZOUTROOM, These are in my favorite types of music, Ambient, Downtempo & Chill, but there are examples like it in almost any other music genre on the Internet. Just go on Shoutcast.com and you'll see what I mean! You don't need a PROPRIETARY PLAYER like at Live365 to play them! These MP3U and AAC+ streams all run fine in my Winamp media player which handles ALL of my music reproduction on the computer. I have my favorite stations bookmarked so I can switch easily between them. It's a pain-in-the-ass to change streams on Live365, one of the reasons I DROPPED them five years ago! ALL of the sites I can tune in to on my Winamp player have NO COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING and no fees necessary to be paid to listen to a reasonably good quality stream, (sorry Live365!). They all "narrowcast" but are very diversified within the music genre. The stream speeds of 128 Kbps and above also produce near compact disc audio quality so BOTH of my computers are connected directly to main audio systems with high quality floor speakers that blow away that dinky small stuff designed for computer reproduction. It is then that you can truly appreciate the quality of audio these sites transmit! Particularly if you decode the stream to a 24-bit sound field instead of a 16-bit! That's UNMATCHED by the proprietary players of these two big websites. Live365 outputs at 1/2 compact disc sampling rate and the loss of definition is striking compared to internal players like Winamp! CONSEQUENTLY,THESE SMALL INDEPENDENT SITES SPREAD ALL OVER THE WORLD ARE WHAT I AND MANY OTHERS WISH TO PROTECT!! Not Live365 and Pandora! Right now because broadcast radio is totally wireless, they still have an advantage, but once the Internet becomes wireless and available anywhere, broadcast radio's days are pretty much done! Right now whenever I get access to a wireless network on my laptop, my favorite sites are all there available to me! SoundExchange had better get used to this type of Internet Radio, because it's what's happening and the trend, not Live365 and Pandora! I've noticed on the Internet that "big" companies are frequently non competitive because they can't THINK CREATIVELY and that makes all the difference in the world on the Internet! Such is the case with both Live365 and Pandora, both of which could disappear tomorrow and wouldn't cause me the slightest concern at all! I would highly suggest that you listen to REAL Internet Radio before writing anymore articles on this subject and also get the idea out of your head that a "big" company is better than a "small" one because on the Internet they're DEFINITELY NOT! By the way It's been OVER 3-YEARS since I listened to a broadcast radio station! The focus is on ADVERTISING and not the supposed "FORMAT"! As far as I am concerned, broadcast radio died when the 1970's radio revolution passed away. I am on the Internet now and not coming back to broadcast radio ever again! My FM tuner just sits there now!
Reply to this comment
advertisement

A CNET Conversation with Eric Schmidt

CNET's Tom Krazit and Molly Wood sit down with Google CEO Eric Schmidt to discuss the future of Android, the Chrome OS, the problem of real-time search indexing, and more.

Verizon tests sending RIAA copyright notices

The No. 2 phone company, known for its reluctance to intervene in antipiracy cases, strikes an agreement to forward copyright notices on behalf of the music industry.

About Digital Media

The Web is now the place to go for news and entertainment. Look here for the latest on blogs, music, video, virtual worlds, social networking and more.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Digital Media topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right