2008-08-11T23:40:04Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/48187 2008-08-11T23:40:04Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-08-11:/comment/37790 steve_hunt_okc http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/598-Clear-Channel-Using-Local-Cred-to-Push-Legislation- 2008-06-27T09:30:24Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-06-27:/comment/30044 tdruth To those who are skeptical of this legislation because of RIAA lobbying money involved, just look at H.R. 244. The only entity with stronger lobbying than RIAA is the National Assn of Broadcasters, i.e., Clear Channel, Cumulus, and others. This will do nothing to free radio - keep in mind that radio already pays a performance royalty to writers and publishers. Why should the artists who make a song famous be deprived of a similar benefit? Moreover, why should small, independent online radio have to pay a performance royalty but large, terrestrial stations not? This bill provides safeguards to small stations - if you don't generate more than $1.25 million, your royalty is capped at $5K. If it's a public station, the cap is even lower at $1K. Performance royalties are one way to ensure artists actually DO get paid for their efforts - as much as they get screwed by the majors, a performance royalty would flow through an independent third party and would not be subject to recoupment by the labels. A performance royalty is the single most artist-friendly concept out there today. The only justification for opposing it is increasing radio conglomerate's profits (and soon even that won't matter since the largest radio owner will soon be privately held). 2008-06-12T22:18:53Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-06-12:/comment/24559 Analog This will definitely hurt a lot of public terrestrial stations. I find it disgusting that such a bill can be met with such approval from the Bush administration. It would not be surprising if most of the lobbying money, if not all of it, involving this bill, is from the RIAA. Disgusting. 2008-06-25T11:14:39Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-06-25:/comment/28455 pmolloy4 Commercial radio stations broadcast millions of recordings every year and as a result they are able to sell $16 billion a year in advertising. We’re the only developed country that allows broadcasting corporations to enjoy such profits and provide no share for the musicians who create the very product that generates all the revenue. Contrary to popular thought, we’re not all rich celebrities. Most of us are struggling to pay our bills every month. This Bill would correct this horrible inequity. 2008-05-12T19:50:57Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-05-12:/comment/14290 tonyt I fell that this bill is going to end free radio. the radio companies are not reporting great profits. I see that the amount of revenue generated looks like alot, but the cost to run a broadcast company must not be cheap. what is the profit of the broadcast companies. i will back this bill if the profits are great. Satellite radio charges there listener and this is why I feel that they should pay. Now on the other hand I don’t agree on internet stations having to pay, unless they are charging there listeners.