Got a tip for us? Share it...

Music Publishers and Writers Lobbying Congress for Additional Compensation for Digital Distribution

CNET reports that a coalition of music groups including publishers, songwriters, and composers is looking to increase the compensation they receive from digital distribution of their work. Having been unsuccessful at negotiating increased fees with distributors such as Apple, the groups, which include the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) among others, have begun lobbying the U.S. Congress for to pass legislation to address their claims.

At a time when many iTunes shoppers are still fuming over Apple's first-ever increase in song prices, the demands by the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), and other performing-rights groups, would likely lead to more price hikes at iTunes. This would also undoubtedly confirm the perception held by many that those overseeing the music industry are greedy.

At the heart of the issue is the "performance fee", a type of licensing fee used to compensate composers and publishers when their work is performed in public. The music groups argue that digital distribution of their work, including 30-second song samples and in TV and movie downloads such as those found on iTunes, constitutes public performance and thus requires performance fees to be paid by the distributors.

Apparently, the music industry can't obtain the fees through negotiations. They have begun lobbying Congress to pass legislation that require anyone selling a download to pay a performance fee, according to David Israelite, president and CEO of the National Music Publishers Association.

"If you watch a TV show on broadcast, cable or satellite TV there is a performance fee collected," Israelite said. "But if that same TV show is downloaded over iTunes, there's not. We're arguing that the law needs to be clarified that regardless of the method by which a consumer watches the show there is a performance right."

The issue is complicated by the existence of other fees such as upfront "synchronization fees" that cover inclusion of songs in film or TV shows. Those fees are typically supplemented by performance fees when the film or TV shows are aired, although many composers have given away their synchronization fee rights in hopes of obtaining performance fees further down the road, but as the landscape has begun shifting to digital distribution, those composers are finding themselves with shrinking performance fee income.

"This is really a fight about the future," Israelite said. "As more and more people watch TV or movies over an Internet line as opposed to cable or broadcast signal, then we're going to lose the income of the performance. For people who do production and background music, that's how they make their living."

On the topic of 30-second music samples, Jonathan Potter, executive director of the Digital Media Association that represents distributors such as Apple, argues that copyright law protects distributors from being charged performance fees for such offerings.

"They are picking on Apple because they say Apple is making a bundle of money," Potter said. "But these companies should be thrilled that Apple and the other services are selling music and generating millions, maybe tens of millions, in royalties."

The music groups have so far had little success in their lobbying efforts with Congress, and courts have consistently sided with digital distributors in their claims that downloaded songs are not considered public performances. Composers and publishers have not, however, given up the fight.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

31 months ago
American greed knows no bounds.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
So if I have this straight they want money for the 30 sec clips people listen to to decide if they want to buy it. That is stupid because with out those clips I would not buy a song. This clips have pushed me over the edge before on a song or I used it to make sure it was the song I was thinking of.

As for the TV and movies, it is because every time we the person watch it they can not collect money. Do they some how thing that a digital copy of a movie/TV is different than a DVD. In my eyes it is one and the same and they do not change for DVDs
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
I dislike people, who - if they fail to reach their goal by negotiations - try to force it on everybody by law.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
Time to start calling my congresspeople and telling them not to pass this legislation.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
I say: let them win their fight, and start charging through the wazoo. And if they want royalties for the playing of their 30 second preview clips, give them that too.

And then we can watch closely as their profits take a downward slide. I wonder: do the indie artists want this too? Unlikely, because they want increased exposure, not less.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
Greed at it's finest. Artists never have truly made money from sales, they generally make most of their money from tours. I think this is another ploy for records labels to increase their pockets, not the artists. I think it goes back to Karma, for decades record labels have been gouging the consumer. With the advent of the "net" they started losing money and they never have recouped. Part of any business model is staying current and in trend, simply they dropped the ball.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
confused....why are they pissed about the 30-second samples?
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
They have a bad analogy.

If over the air broadcasts are a performance. Then so should streaming internet shows/music. However, iTunes is not streaming. It is digital distribution of a CD/DVD and not a performance.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
To me the RIAA has lost all creditability after they were caught illegally raising prices of CDs then they bitch how they lost money. Yes it happen years ago but it will leave a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of my life which is at least the next 50 years if not more.

They are greedy. Time and time again the RIAA has failed to adjust with the times. They fought digital copies of the song for years even when it shown that it was the next wave they still fought it. They can not adjust to change. the RIAA has single handily killed music by not allowing it to change.

How much has music really change the in the past 10-15 years. Yes we have new artist but at the time time if you listen to stuff made in the 90's and then today low and be hold they have the same styling...... Sad. You can pick out music from the 80's based on style but one can not tell the defence between 90's and the 00's
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
31 months ago
You all do realize a lot of these writers make next to nothing.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives

[ Read All Comments ]