Well, the RIAA seems to be off to a busy start for this month, what with their latest blitz of lawsuits against college students instead of just allowing judicial affairs to punish them. Oh, and even more significant is their attempt to stifle the proposed FAIR USE Act that was recently introduced in the House by Boucher and Doolittle (yeah I know, but at least he did something decent, instead of just kissing K-Street's ass.) Unfortunately, the RIAA has opened a second front in their War on the Internet: Internet Radio.
The RIAA is already trying to nullify the 1992 Home Recording Act (which is what legally allows you to privately record music from your radio) by getting Biden and Feinstein to introduce the PERFORM ACT which would extend DRM to satellite radio stations.
They just fired a second shot in at newer radio stations, by getting U.S. Copyright Royalty Board to support a plan that would retroactively raise royalty fees for the rights to play/stream music:
The End Of Internet Radio As We Know It
Copyright Protection Board Deals Fatal Blow to Ad-Free Internet Radio
By Martin H. Bosworth
ConsumerAffairs.Com
March 5, 2007
It may be time to dust off the old FM radio that's been collecting dust the past few years.
The U.S. Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) has endorsed a plan by SoundExchange, the royalty-collections division of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), to retroactively raise the fees Internet radio broadcasters must pay to broadcast their music.
The royalty increases are so high that many Web-based radio stations will have to go out of business or dramatically increase advertising to cover the royalty fees.
"It's the end of Internet radio as we know it," one broadcaster fumed. "The RIAA wants to put us all out of business."
The CRB's new royalty structure begins at $.0008 per performance, retroactive to January of 2006. While that may not seem like a lot at first, the CRB decision defines "per performance" for Web radio as streaming one song to one listener.
...Looks like the RIAA doesn't want competition to their old payola partners in crime. Because of this, your choices online will plummet, as streaming online will no longer be profitable for smaller websites.
...On a side note, you know that website that the RIAA launched that allows people to settle their suits? After you give them their money, their site responds with a notice that say "Looking forward to future business together." If that doesn't sound like something out of a mob film, then I don't know what it sounds like. "Business" apparently means: "pay the $18 for our CDs with only three good songs, or you'll be bending over for soap when we're done with you."
...If you are disgusted with the RIAA's recent spate of thuggery, Gizmodo has announced a Boycott the RIAA Month. I suggest boycotting them by getting RIAA-owned music from friends via blank CDs or USB jump drives, buying used CDs that are immune from an RIAA tithe on the used record store, and attend the concerts of your favorite artists to give them more revenue that won't be sucked out from under them by the RIAA. Oh, and support independent artists. The website EMusic.com offers a subscription service that is much more generous than itunes, and sells music without DRM on it. Unfortunately, the big labels have refused to sell their music on this site, but this gives Indy artists more exposure. Oh, and there is the Electronic Frontier Foundation which is fighting the RIAA, and among other things, has proposed solving the downloading revenue dilemma by instituting a Collective Licensing System to pay artists based on a monthly surcharge to your ISP for continued use of p2p programs at an unlimited rate.