H.R.848 - Performance Rights Act Sponsor: John Conyers / 111th Congress

Title
111th Congress - To provide parity in radio performance rights under title 17, United States Code, and for other purposes.
Summary
To provide parity in radio performance rights under title 17, United States Code, and for other purposes. (by CRS)
Status
The bill has passed through committee and has been put on a legislative calendar.

Customize

Customize the interests supporting and opposing this bill

To remove an interest, click the Remove button next to its name below this box.

To add an interest, choose one from this list:

To add an interest, click Support or Oppose.

You can share your customized pages with other people by sending them the URL for pages about this bill. Other MAPLight.org users will not see your customizations unless they use the URL you send them. To save your customizations for your next visit, create a free New Account, then Sign In.

Done

Interests who did want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Interests who did not want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Contribution data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org)

Comments RSS feed

Time to give fair compensation; current policy outmoded by Casey Fulmer, Mar 10, 2009 (7:24pm)

Under current policy, songwriters and those who own songs as intellectual property are compensated when their works are played on terrestrial radio, but singers and musicians do not receive any payment for the use of their recorded performance. This policy dates back to 1909, before music and radio became integrally intertwined, and has been sustained with the argument that it constitutes a symbiotic relationship in which radio play attracts listeners to the station and simultaneously exposes the public to new music, encouraging album sales. However, here is the only instance of copyrightable performance not to involve compensation, and only on terrestrial radio, as singers and musicians are compensated when their works are transmitted online.

Much of the rest of the world does compensate singers and musicians for airplay. But foreign artists do not receive compensation for US airplay and, reciprocally, US artists do not receive compensation when their recordings are played abroad. This creates an economic incentive for foreign broadcasters to play American music, facilitating an unintentional exploitation and exportation of one facet of American culture.

Opponents of this bill call it a ‘record-label bailout’ because a significant part of a royalty likely ends up with the artist’s label, but that is a farther-reaching complaint with the way the music industry operates and its apparent inability to adapt to the digital revolution. Commercial rights and fair compensation for the use of one’s property are not time-sensitive issues arising only in a time of economic crisis. We would do well to foster and protect those rights, joining other countries by expressing respect for artists and fairness in radio practices.

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close

Do you really want to harm local radio? by Anonymous, Mar 19, 2009 (4:17pm)

On Wednesday, February 4, 2009, H.R. 848/S. 379 was introduced at the request of big, internationally owned record labels. This bill would levy a new “performance fee” to be paid by radio stations to record labels for the music we play over the air (for free), to listeners. This tax will cost the radio industry $7 billion annually. This legislation will harm free local radio. Many stations will be forced to close shop because they can’t afford to pay the fee.

If this legislation passes,the fee would be so onerous that every station will be forced to reduce staffing which would in turn reduce local news, traffic and weather coverage as well as our community service efforts. H.R. 848/S. 379 will threaten new artists trying to break into the recording business and it will harm listeners who rely on local radio.

For more than 80 years, records labels and performers have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship. Radio provides free airplay for music to 235 million listeners across the country per week. A recent economic study concluded that the promotion from radio air play provides $1.5 to $2.4 billion worth of music sales for big record labels not to mention additional billions from concert tickets and merchandise sales.

The proponents of H.R. 848/S. 379 claim this bill is designed to “compensate artists” but more than half of the new taxes will go into the pockets of foreign owned record labels. Congress has for more than 8 decades recognized the current system of free radio airplay provides the recording industry a mutually beneficial economic relationship.

If this legislation passes, many family-owned and minority-owned radio stations will see most of their profits “wiped out” and in some case radio stations will “go dark”. Why raise taxes on an industry that is already suffering in a time of an unprecedented economic advertising downturn?

Small radio stations will all suffer from this proposed legislation. With the recent devastating ice storms in Kentucky, television stations were off the air, Internet service died, newspapers could not be published only local radio was able to provide emergency information including road conditions, weather updates, and news from local officials.

Do you really want to harm local radio and listeners who rely on this free service?

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close