April 25, 2024

Congressman Vows to Introduce Bill on Radio Royalties

Representative Melvin L. Watt, a Democrat from North Carolina, said on Thursday that he planned to introduce a bill requiring broadcasters to recognize the performance rights of record companies and musicians, the latest effort in a decades-old fight by the music industry to extract greater royalties from radio.

Radio broadcasters in the United States — almost alone in the world — pay royalties only to music publishers and songwriters for terrestrial airplay, meaning when songs are played over the air on AM or FM radio. They don’t pay royalties to record companies or performing artists, under the argument that the promotional value those parties receive is sufficient compensation.

The music industry has tried numerous times over the years to change this situation — Frank Sinatra was a leading advocate — but has always failed.

Mr. Watt said that he planned to introduce a bill before Congress’s recess in August that would establish this performance right for sound recordings. Mr. Watt told the Washington publication The Hill that this could lead to private licensing negotiations between broadcasters and record companies.

Such a bill would not go as far as the last effort at forging a performing rights bill. That bill was introduced in 2009 and would have mandated a royalty. It never came to a full vote in Congress, and although it led to negotiations between broadcasters and music groups, the talks fell apart in 2010 amid acrimony on both sides.

Music groups and broadcasters on Thursday quickly stated their opposing stances over the proposed bill.

“We applaud Ranking Member Watt for taking leadership to end the decades-long injustice that denies performers’ compensation when their work is played on AM/FM radio,” the musicFIRST Coalition, representing record labels, musicians’ unions and other groups, said in a statement.

The National Association of Broadcasters, which has been gearing up for a new fight by promoting a nonbinding resolution in Congress against a change, said that it “strongly opposes a new performance tax that would kill jobs at America’s hometown radio stations while diverting millions of dollars to offshore record labels.”

Mr. Watt’s announcement came just as more news of a growing alternative to royalty legislation emerged. Clear Channel Communications, which has struck a number of private licensing deals with independent record companies, paying royalties for terrestrial airplay in exchange for lower online streaming rates, announced on Thursday that it had made a similar arrangement with the label Innovative Leisure, whose acts include Bass Drum of Death, Crystal Antlers and Classixx.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/26/business/media/congressman-vows-to-introduce-bill-on-radio-royalties.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Google Expected to Start a Competitor to Spotify

Google is planning to introduce the new service as early as Wednesday at Google I/O, the company’s annual conference for software developers. The subscription feature will be connected to Play, Google’s online media hub, complementing its download store and “locker” feature, which lets people store their digital entertainment collections online, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity before Google’s official announcement.

News of the announcement first appeared on The Verge, a technology-oriented Web site. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment.

Google has been developing entertainment features for Android mobile devices, which puts the company in direct competition with digital music leaders like Apple, whose iTunes store is the largest retailer of music — digital or physical — in the United States. While Android phones and other devices remain extremely popular, Google has had limited success with its download store, people in the music business say.

By expanding to streaming music, Google will be tapping into the most rapid growth area in digital music. Spotify, which was founded in Sweden in 2008 and came to the United States almost two years ago, now has more than 24 million regular users, six million of whom pay about $5 to $10 a month for premium service. Pandora now has more than 200 million users, the vast majority of whom use it free.

Apple is also said to be developing a Pandora-like Internet radio service, although its negotiations with record labels and publishers have been slow.

Google’s streaming service will not include a free tier, according to the people briefed on the plans. The subscription rate was not known, but was expected to be similar to that of Spotify and other competing services like Rhapsody and Rdio, about $10 a month.

To get the licenses it needs, Google has been negotiating with record companies for months — a slow process in any case, which sometimes takes longer in Google’s case because of its complicated relationship with the major record companies. While record labels now turn to Google’s YouTube for a big part of their promotional campaigns, the labels’ trade group, the Recording Industry Association of America, has criticized Google for not doing enough to combat online music piracy.

Google is said to have licensing deals for the service with the three major record labels: the Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and the Warner Music Group. Representatives of those labels declined to comment.

Making matters more complicated, the service to be unveiled this week is one of two parallel music services being prepared by separate branches of Google. YouTube, which last week introduced a few dozen paid video channels, is also said to be developing a music service. The details of YouTube’s service are unclear, but negotiations are said to be continuing with music companies.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/business/media/google-set-to-introduce-music-service-to-compete-with-spotify.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Media Decoder Blog: Music Companies Fight Over the Scraps of EMI

After the main course, the leftovers.

Such is the state of dealmaking in the music industry, after the breakup of EMI that gave the historic British company’s record labels to the Universal Music Group for $1.9 billion and its huge music publishing division to a consortium led by Sony for $2.2 billion. Music’s corporate landscape was shifted as a result, with the number of major labels shrinking to three from four, and the creation of the world’s largest song catalog controlled by Sony’s publishing arm, Sony/ATV.

Over the last few months, though, there has been aggressive competition for smaller chunks unloaded by Sony and Universal on the orders of European regulators. Last week, the Warner Music Group paid $765 million for the biggest of these side dishes, the Parlophone Label Group, with recordings by Coldplay, Pink Floyd, Radiohead and many others. It must still be approved by regulators, but is not expected to face significant opposition.

One of the bidders that lost out on Parlophone was BMG Rights Management, a five-year-old joint venture between Bertelsmann and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. But BMG has been successful in several other EMI-related sales. Early Friday it announced it was buying Sanctuary Records from Universal, which includes classic albums by the Kinks and Black Sabbath.

The Sanctuary sale is estimated at about $60 million, and it follows two other BMG acquisitions late last year: the Mute Records catalog (Depeche Mode, Moby), formerly a part of EMI, and a collection of publishing assets from EMI and Sony/ATV. Those two deals were reportedly worth a little more than $100 million.

Warner, now the smallest major, gained some needed bulk in Parlophone. BMG’s various deals will help the company flesh out its business model, gaining a foothold in recordings after an intense focus on publishing assets that have led it to quickly build a catalog of more than one million songs.

The cupboard is not completely empty, though. Universal is still selling EMI’s share of the long-running compilation series “Now That’s What I Call Music!” as well as Universal’s Co-Op Music label. Those are expected to be small deals, but along with the Parlophone deal, they will help to substantially reduce the effective price that Universal will have paid for two-thirds of EMI.


Ben Sisario writes about the music industry. Follow @sisario on Twitter.

Article source: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/music-companies-fight-over-the-scraps-of-emi/?partner=rss&emc=rss

In Rock Hall of Fame Vote, a Battle of Industry Egos

Specifically, for a nod from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland, where the stars who once filled our ears get another shot at immortality, or at least some big money.

With the recording industry under financial attack from many sides, one of the few ways for old acts to pique new interest is to be inducted into the hall of fame. So, each fall, managers and record labels dive into a mosh pit of monster egos, clashing tastes and rival interests in the industry, all in the hope of placing their artists among the royalty of rock. The 15 nominees for 2012 include The Cure, Donna Summer, Joan Jett and the Blackhearts and Guns N’ Roses. Ballots are due on Sunday, and winners will be announced on Wednesday.

For the inductees, the reward can be enormous. Weekly record sales for a performer or band leap 40 to 60 percent, on average, in the weeks after selection, says David Bakula, a senior vice president at Nielsen SoundScan. While winning a Grammy often helps one album, a nod from Cleveland can lift an entire back catalog.

These days, labels and artists need all the help they can get. The music business is worth half of what it was 10 years ago, and the decline doesn’t look as if it will slow anytime soon. Total revenue from shipments of CDs, DVDs and other music products in the United States was $6.85 billion in 2010, according to the Recording Industry Association of America; in 2000, that figure topped $14 billion.

But the path to the hall of fame can be long and difficult. Controversy surrounds the selection process, which is shrouded in secrecy.

What is known is that a nominating committee of about 30 music critics, entertainment lawyers and recording executives winnows the field each year to 15 artists. Then another committee, this one of about 500 people, including past winners, selects five inductees. Artists can qualify for a spot 25 years after their first recording, which means that performers from the 1980s now have a chance to rank up there with Elvis. (The winners to be announced this week will be inducted at a ceremony next April.)

With fame and money at stake, it’s no surprise that a lot of backstage lobbying goes on. Why any particular act is chosen in any particular year is a mystery to performers as well as outsiders — and committee members say they want to keep it that way. The Bee Gees were passed over 11 times before being inducted in 1997; some fans and managers say the long wait reflected an anti-disco bias within the selection committees. And despite 27 studio albums and 45 years of touring, as well as a style that would influence many other artists, Alice Cooper was passed over 16 times before finally being inducted this year.

“When I wasn’t being nominated, I played it down all the time,” Mr. Cooper says. “But it really does make a big difference.”

He continues: “I used to think that when you got in, you’d understand how it worked, and how you get nominated — there would be a secret handshake, and there’d be a dossier about Area 51 and the president’s assassination.”

No such luck.

Rhino Records, which handles his back catalog, took advantage of his induction, however. It ran 30-second spots during the televised induction ceremony and made sure that Alice Cooper compilations, boxed sets and deluxe editions were available at Web sites and brick-and-mortar retailers. Mr. Cooper says the number of young people attending his concerts has jumped. So far this year, sales of his CDs, digital albums and other compilations are up significantly in the United States, to about 115,000 from 75,000 in all of 2010, according to Nielsen SoundScan.

THIS hall-of-fame effect is well established in the recording industry. For instance, sales of Bee Gees albums surged to 1.1 million in 1997, the year of the group’s induction, from 210,000 in 1996. Sales of Fleetwood Mac albums jumped to 3.2 million in 1998, when that band was inducted, from 483,000 in 1997, according to SoundScan.

In 2009, good news from Cleveland bolstered the career of Wanda Jackson, “the queen of rockabilly,” who gained fame in the mid-1950s and 60s. After Ms. Jackson was inducted, she collaborated on an album with Jack White of the White Stripes. Suddenly Ms. Jackson, who is now 74, was everywhere, opening for Adele’s 2011 tour and even rocking out, alongside Mr. White, on the “Late Show With David Letterman.”

“She had a phenomenal and, frankly, deserved refocus on her life and career,” says Joel Peresman, the president and chief executive of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation. “I think we give some really deserved artists another chance at the spotlight.”

Their labels get another chance, too. The biggest gains come for artists who, along with managers and record labels, aggressively promote their hall-of-fame status in music magazines and online. Many also rush out or reissue boxed sets, greatest-hits albums and commemorative CD-DVD collections.

“Because of the increased awareness, there’s definitely an increase in sales across their catalogs,” says Jane Ventom, senior vice president for catalog marketing at EMI Music North America.

Bands that split up near the peak of their popularity and then get back together for the induction ceremonies can reap the biggest rewards, because fans often dream of a big reunion tour, à la the Eagles.

“With certain artists, it really gives them another bite at the apple,” Mr. Peresman says.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=272e2e7f2bf234c12135cd675b1652db