• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Articles, Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured, Featured Article

Rethinking Performance Royalties for Sound Recordings

Submitted by Sean Braun on October 1, 2012 – 1:00 AM60082 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F10%2F01%2Frethinking-performance-royalties-for-sound-recordings%2FRethinking+Performance+Royalties+for+Sound+Recordings2012-10-01+05%3A00%3A14Sean+Braunhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6008

In my previous article, I addressed the concept of piracy as an effective marketing strategy.  Ten years ago such a strategy would have been taboo, but the creative community is being forced to think outside of the box more and more to find commercial success.  It is somewhat ironic then, that in an era of iTunes and Spotify, Sirius XM and Pandora, most people still find the latest and greatest popular music by tuning their radio dial.  In the past, copyright holders were given quite a boost from radio airtime—a catchy single might lead to over one million albums sold and a successful tour.  For this reason, broadcast radio has spent the past century free of performance royalties—money paid to owners of sound recordings whenever their recording is performed.

However, developments in digital technology over the past twenty years have made broadcast radio more about content and less about promotion.  Kevin Parks, an IP attorney and author of Music & Copyright in America, supports this conclusion with a direct quote from Register of Copyrights Marybeth Peters. “Terrestrial broadcasters have long enjoyed the freedom to use the newest record releases without any payment to the artists or the record companies.  While in the past, broadcasters’ argument that airplay promotes the sale of records may have had validity, such a position is hard to justify today.”  For example, hearing the song “Gangnam Style” on the radio may drive you to purchase the song for $1.29 on iTunes (or download it illegally), but it will not likely compel you to buy the artist’s album or attend a concert.  This fact is not lost on the creative community, whose desire for the next big hit is tempered by the desire to be fairly compensated for the exploitation of their intellectual property.

Because broadcasters have always operated without paying performance royalties, the concept of a “pay-per-play” system in music is still somewhat novel.  Performance royalties in this context first appeared in the late 1990s to alleviate the concern that digital music would ruin the industry by allowing on demand access to streaming content.  The government feared, as did musicians, that streaming content would replace the need to purchase sound recordings and discourage recording artists from creating new and original content.

If this sounds familiar, it is.  The success of digital media has turned the tables on broadcast radio.  More and more, the Copyright Royalty Board and Congress are lobbied to lower royalty rates for Internet and satellite radio companies while forcing broadcasters to pay-per-play.  In 2009, Congressman John Conyers (D-MI) submitted the Performance Rights Act (“PRA”) to the House Judiciary Committee with the support of a number of recording artists.  Smashing Pumpkins guitarist/vocalist Billy Corgan, spoke before the Judiciary Committee on behalf of The Music First Coalition, a group whose sole purpose is to secure performance royalties from broadcast radio play.  Mr. Corgan remarked:

All areas of the modern music business are currently feeling the shifting tides as new models emerge and old ones are broken up. Ours is a business that always begins with the brilliance of the artists. Contrary to long-held myths, it does take money to create new music. As the traditional revenue streams have dried up, most notably in the overall decline of record sales, it has placed stress on who continues to benefit from the old models. The future demands new partnerships and a rethinking of long-held practices about how artists should be compensated for their music.

The fact that broadcast radio accounts for the majority of radio listenership is even more telling.  If copyright holders are still losing money, it cannot be from Internet and satellite radio alone.  To create a system that is fair for all parties involved, the promotional value of broadcast radio must be reconsidered.

At the same time, it is just as important for Congress to address the need to lower performance royalties for Internet radio stations like Pandora.  Last week, the Internet Radio Fairness Act of 2012 (“IRFA”) was introduced in the House and the Senate.  The goal of the act is to address prior laws implemented to directly disadvantage Internet radio, encourage innovation in digital broadcasting, and increase competition in the music marketplace.  By allowing Internet Radio to operate at a lower cost, the government is opening the market to more companies capable of delivering a diverse blend of new musical content.  It is imperative that Congress supports bills like the PRA and IRFA to continue promoting the progress of useful arts.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Sean Braun

Sean Braun is a third year at Washington College of Law. He graduated from Syracuse University in 2010 with a B.A. in American History, where he won the Bernice Hogan Award for Best History Essay of 2010 for "Rock 'N Roll Impressarios & 1960s Music Culture." Sean is a blogger for the IP Brief and a Dean's Fellow in the Office of Admissions. He has worked for the entertainment/media law firms Roberts & Hafitz in New York and Hertz & Lichtenstein LLP in Los Angeles. Sean is interested in the copyright issues that spring from the rapid evolution of music media.

Sean Braun has written 9 posts for the IPB.

60082 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F10%2F01%2Frethinking-performance-royalties-for-sound-recordings%2FRethinking+Performance+Royalties+for+Sound+Recordings2012-10-01+05%3A00%3A14Sean+Braunhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6008 »

  • Chad says:
    October 2, 2012 at 9:15 PM

    An informative and concise article.

    The content was great, yet the delivery could be improved. A few grammatical changes would make this more understandable to a global audience. Also, I viewed this on an iPhone and was distracted by the spacings between the words.

    Thanks for the great work Sean!

    -Chad

    Reply to this comment »
    • Sean says:
      October 10, 2012 at 11:12 AM

      Thanks for your comments Chad. I am glad you enjoyed my post!

      -Sean

      Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

The Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision, which reasoned that the drug posed public health and safety concerns, creates serious patent implications with regard to generic drugs.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Stand up for your Rights: Family Settles Feud over Publicity Rights in Bob Marley. Please Join IP Brief for our 2nd Annual Symposium: Patent Subject-Matter Eligibility Today Facebook Friending = False Advertising?  An Intriguing Case to Watch May Have the Answer Supreme Court Denies Cert: USC Triumphs Over USC in Trademark Dispute Did Glee Steal from Jonathan Coulton? Best Buy vs. NewEgg: Who Owns “Geek”? Subway: That’s Our “Footlong” Chinese Trademark Office Refuses Registration for “FRACOGNAC” Mark Brave: Pixar's Ode to Atlanta Baseball Is Nike AirForce 1 Threatened, Nike Chooses Moot over Suit Don't Forget Common Sense
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay
  • Oh, That’s Different … Never mind: USPTO Withdraws Ruling that IPAD MINI is “Merely Descriptive”

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License