The phrase "rocky patch" may be putting it lightly if some of the publications around the web are right. Many are predicting the upcoming demise of the company as a result of a federal panel ruling ordering them to pay twice the royalties to artists that they already were.

The way it works now, Pandora pays an organization called SoundExchange, which represents the artists and their respective record labels. The Industry Standard sheds a little more light on radio and royalties:

Because of the bastardized regulation introduced when new forms of music delivery are developed — first, terrestrial radio, then satellite, now Internet — radio station owners pay different rates depending on how the music is delivered. "Traditional" radio pays nothing in performance royalties, though SoundExchange is — of course — trying to change that. Satellite radio companies, for now limited to SiriusXM, pay around 6-7 percent of revenue: roughly 1.6 cents per hour per listener. Internet radio stations like Pandora are required to pay 2.91 cents per hour per listener — a significant chunk of change for companies who, like so many Internet companies, haven’t figured out a way to make much revenue.

It’s not looking good for Pandora. Even Westergren told the Washington Post, "We’re approaching a pull-the-plug kind of decision."

It’s a real shame too, because for people like us who make our living on the Internet, sites like Pandora can make work more enjoyable through endless playlists of background music that the listener actually enjoys entirely.

The exact amount of the agreed-upon flat fee remains unknown – heck, even an official ballpark is unavailable – so it’s hard to know how to treat this news.  The development may stave off a copyright infringement lawsuit or two, which would certainly be valuable to YouTube.  Then again, so would keeping cash in its pocket, and the company’s lawyers are quite good.

Another unclear issue is the matter of what will happen from this point forward.  “All four major record labels have now made licensing deals which mean they take a share of the advertising revenue when YouTube carries their music,” notes Jonathan Richards for the Times Online, “but this is the first deal which ensures that revenue will also be collected on behalf of song-writers and publishers.”

Ah, well.  We can at least return to safe ground by describing the MCPS-PRS Alliance’s membership; an article in The Guardian names Sir Paul McCartney and Eric Idle (AKA “Sir Robin”), in addition to Amy Winehouse and Lily Allen, as standing among the ranks.  And anything that benefits a Beatle and a Python can’t be all bad.

And that means that independent web radio stations are not exempt from royalty rates, recently hiked, even if the artist never intended for there to be a royalty in the first place.

As "DJ ProFusion" at DailyKos wrote:

SoundExchange (the RIAA) considers any digital performance of a song as falling under their compulsory license. If any artist records a song, SoundExchange has the right to collect royalties for its performance on Internet radio. Artists can offer to download their music for free, but they cannot offer their songs to Internet radio for free.

Live365 reports that over 55 percent of music played over Internet channels come from independent artists (non-RIAA), compared to just 13 percent over the conventional airwaves. And though the solution was offered that webcasters only play independent music, they will not be exempt from royalty collections.

How does this happen?

TechDirt’s Mike Masnick sums it up well:

The RIAA tells people that simply listening to music without paying for it is a terrible crime that people should be punished for. Yet… the RIAA getting money for non-RIAA music and not paying the deserving artists that money is perfectly legal? Damn, the RIAA lobbyists are good.

DC To Webcasters: Drop Dead

If the SaveNetRadio coalition had hopes a Democratic majority might help it stave off a crippling royalty increase, they can probably pack those hopes in a sack, add a couple of bricks, and drop it into the Potomac.

BusinessWeek said the result of a recent House Small Business Committee hearing resulted in only an affirmation of Congress’ inertia on the issue. Congress isn’t going to get involved.

Two Democratic Representatives from New York, Nydia Velazquez and Yvette Clarke, commented on their lack of action in the report. Velazquez doesn’t "Congress would be the best type of vehicle to resolve this type of issue.:

Clarke hasn’t heard "what the win-win is" with the issue. Gosh, Congressperson, haven’t you ever heard of a compromise?

A number of Representatives have backed a bill, referred to as the Internet Radio Equality Act, and a similar measure is making the rounds of the Senate. Negotiations may still bear fruit, too.

"We might now be at the beginning of real negotiations with SoundExchange," Ian Rogers, general manager of Yahoo Music, said in the report. He commented on the issue of webcast royalties this week, saying, "the new royalty rates are higher than the revenues anyone can hope to make from related advertising."

As far as Internet users are concerned, it’s been a crummy week. The FTC shrugged at net neutrality in counseling a wait and see attitude to legislation for it. Congress wants nothing to do with the webcasting royalties issue.

At least it was a bipartisan non-effort.

When Google acquired YouTube last October, the search company assured investors on both sides that it had a foolproof plan in place to address potential legal liabilities that could stem from copyrighted material that had been uploaded to the popular video-sharing site.

The only problem is that someone forgot to tell all the media companies about this arrangement.

Universal Music Group, in particular, has been especially assertive in pursuing copyright claims against content sites that make use of work from its artists. The settlement with Bolt could provide precedent for its ongoing copyright infringement case against MySpace.

The popular social networking social has since tried to remove any Universal content from its site and says it is working to develop filters to prevent it from being uploaded at all.

"MySpace is dedicated to ensuring that content owners, whether large or small, can both promote and protect their content in our community,” Chris DeWolfe, the chief executive of MySpace, said in a New York Times article.

“For MySpace, video filtering is about protecting artists and the work they create.”

Officials at Universal Music Group, however, believe that MySpace’s effort to protect Universal’s content is too little, too late.

“The copyright law doesn’t give people the right to engage in the massive infringement of our content to build a thriving business and then, after the fact, avoid exposure by saying they will prospectively start to filter,” says Universal spokesman Peter Lofrumento in the piece.

Now I have to wonder if Google has purchased a giant headache for itself with the acquisition of YouTube.

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Furl

Ideas include such things as mechanical things, chemical compounds, designs, works of art, advertising and business plans, ideas for improving a design, flavor, etc. of an existing product or service. Many thousands of dollars are paid out to idea men each year by industries.

If your idea will increase production, increase sales or improve the product, they will be willing to pay substantial money when they accept it. First, you must know how to protect the ideas that you generate.

Ideas that are made public by word of mouth or even in writing become public property unless you first make an agreement to retain all rights to your ideas.

Let s say that you have an idea for increasing the sales of an existing product for company A. Write them a letter similar to this one in duplicate:

Gentlemen: I have developed a new idea for increasing the sales of your product.

This new method will not increase your costs in any manner. If you are interested in the full details I shall forward them to you upon receipt of the below signed agreement.

We the undersigned agree to receive in confidence full details about an idea for increasing the sales of widgets as submitted by (your name). It is further understood that we assume no responsibility whatever with respect to features, which can be demonstrated to be already known to us.

We also agree not to divulge any details of the idea submitted without permission of (your name) or to make use of any feature of information of which (your name) is the originator without payment of compensation to be fixed by negotiation with (your name) or his lawful representative. It is specifically understood that in receiving the idea of (Your name) it will be reviewed in confidence and within a 30 day period we will report to (your name) the results of our findings and will advise whether or not we are interested in negotiating for the purchase of the rights to use said idea.

Have them sign both copies and return one to you. Then you must submit complete details of your idea to the company after they review your idea they must by law follow the instructions of the agreement. Many idea men are earning substantial money following this procedure. The sky is the limit but make darn sure that you first get the agreement signed prior to disclosing your idea. Otherwise no go!

To increase chances of having ideas accepted spend lots of time preparing complete minute details before you submit them.

This is the key! Include illustrations of drawings if it’s necessary to get the story over.

Karl Mills,
articles@successfull-rewards.com

http://www.successfull-rewards.com

Karl Mills is the owner of Successfull Rewards
Home Business “In a Box” at http://www.successfull-rewards.com
Consultant Sales Rep and Trainer with over 20 years of experience.
He is also publisher of the free Online Winners Newsletter
featuring e-courses, articles, tips, ‘pointers’ and bonus ebooks.