MEANDER HOME | Urgent: Call your Senators and ask them to support and co-sponsor bill S1353. Also, urge your Congressman to support HR 2060, the Internet Radio Equality Bill. Here's how. SAVE INTERNET RADIO...YOUR HELP IS URGENTLY NEEDED, NOW. FIND OUT MORE, CLICK HERE. Read the station owner's message to listeners about the current internet radio crisis, here. 
Join us on MySpace 
Take our survey 
|
|
|
|
| | |
| 
| Click the picture, above, to listen | Death knell sounds for Internet Radio |
Singer-songwriter Joey Allcorn, featured in the video above, testifies during a Congressional hearing in Washington on June 28, concerning the impending destruction of internet radio, and in support of the Internet Radio Equality Act (IREA) in Congress and the Senate, now. MONTE VISTA,CO--Two Monte Vista-based Internet Radio stations are facing royalty rates from 300 to 1200 percent of what the broadcast provision of the Small Webcaster's Settlement Act allowed- royalties based on revenue or expenses. Now those rates are based on plays, after the Copyright Royalty Board nullified the Congressionally mandated SWSA on March 2. These stations are two of fifty SWSA stations who paid their royalty fees or at least half of the required $2,000 up front, in January, in good faith, depending on the SWSA to still be there after the Copyright Royalty Board made a determination on rates. The broadcasters were wrong, and were surprised that the CRB could throw the SWSA out. These fifty stations are among thousands of other broadcasters facing enormous rate hikes, espoused by SoundExchange and it's original parent company the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which is made up of record labels, the most visible and powerful of which are the "big 4", Warner, Sony BMG, EMI, and Universal Records. Internet broadcast advocates believe that the major labels did not keep up with marketing advancements, and digital solutions, and now find themselves grasping at straws to survive. Accused of not embracing the digital revolution, webcasters believe the motive for promoting higher royalty rates is not for their major artists' benefit, but to destroy the only avenue for Independent artists, currently- Internet Radio. SoundExchange insists through press releases, that their motives are for the benefit of artists. The organization is in question, regarding the validity of its involvement in collecting fees from webcasters, in light of the fact that they owe the RIAA millions of dollars from a loan. Their lack of impartiality, by virtue of their debt to the RIAA, and activity in lobbying are both criticized by webcasters as unethical. Dianne Lockhart, owner of Solace Radio and Meander Radio, is among thousands of small webcasters who might have to shut their stations down after July 15, the deadline for the new rates to go into effect. She broadcasts as part of the Live365 Network, trading streaming costs and storage for the Network running their ads on her stations. "Even if I could stay on the air, my broadcast provider, Live365, if shut down, would prevent me from continuing," said Lockhart. A hearing before the House subcommittee on June 27 revealed that, although many Representatives have co-sponsored the Bill, the speaker maintained that webcasters should "work it out" with the collecting organization, SoundExchange. That has been impossible, according to webcasters, hence the introduction of the IREA by Congressman Jay Inslee. Many are hoping for a Stay in Congress that would prevent the new rates from going into effect, until Congress and the Senate can get the bills out of committee. The bill in Congress is HR 2060 and the Senate Bill is SB 1353. Webcasters across the board are calling for citizens to contact their Congressional representatives and Senators, to get the bill moving. On the net: http://www.live365.com/choice |
|
 Meander Radio
...because laughter and music are good for the soul | | About our artists (Artists who are direct-licensed to our station) | For a direct-license form to receive airplay and promotion on Meander Radio, email us, contact us on MySpace, or call us at (719) 852-5813. | | | | | | |
 Steve Hofstetter
Author, columnist, and comedian Steve Hofstetter has often been called the hardest working man in show-business. With all due respect to the late James Brown. One of the top booked acts on the college circuit, the 27-year-old humorist is also a weekly humor columnist for both SportsIllustrated.com and NHL.com. After hosting Four Quotas on Sirius Satellite Radio for two seasons, Hofstetter moved to broadcast radio, and his Sports Minute (Or So) is currently syndicated on over 100 stations. Hofstetter recently released his first live comedy album, CURE FOR THE CABLE GUY, which debuted at #22 on Billboard’s comedy charts. His website. 
Robin James Robin James sang into a microphone for the first time at age 2. She held her first concert at 16, and produced her first CD in 2002, with a CD release concert at Adams State College. Her second CD, People Say, was released in May, 2007, and embodies the vocal virtuosity and multi-genre talent that she is known for. Frequently asked to sing lead or backup vocals on other artists' CD projects, Robin has the ability to translate a piece of music into exactly what the artist envisioned when they composed it. James plays piano, violin, and guitar, but she says her main instrument is her voice. Her website. 
Bryan McCree Bryan McCree has been seen on HBO's Comedy Central, and has appeared in
concert with Sinbad, the Isley Brothers, and Cameo. He's also appeared in such movies as "Chameleon STreet (which wond the grand jury prize in the 1989 Sundance Film Festival) and Lunatics (the executive producers made Darkman and the Evel Dead series.) He has appeared at comedy clubs from Catch a Rising STar to the Comedy Zone. His comedic act makes astute observations on life which are edgy and hilarious. His funniest character? Himself. His website. 
Lorraine Messina An emerging comedienne, Lorraine Messina sees the comedy in everyday life, and the people who inhabit her world. Messina takes the everyday things we all deal with, and finds the humor and irony in them. Her website.  Tommy Savitt
Tommy Savitt is an International Comedy Star on the rise. He has played all over the world, entertaining audiences at home and abroad. Savitt has a unique style of comedy that will challenge your beliefs while making you laugh. Tommy's ironic take on dating, politics, and life will have you on the edge of your seat with laughter. His website. 
Fabrizio Selli Born in Milan, Italy, where he studied piano and composition, Fabrizio Selli began composing when he was a child. Having fallen in love for classical and jazz music, as well as pop, he worked as a piano and keyboards player, musician and arranger in many different music environments, recording jingles, soundtracks, dance and electronic records (with major music labels) in both Italy and other parts of Europe. In addition to ‘popular’ sounds, he enjoys composing in his own style, which is a mix between new age, classical, and pop. He defines this mix as "soundtracks without movies"—a handiwork of piano composition and the wise use of various technologies. Selli's work is truly art, painted with musical notes- in which one can get lost in the feelings and pictures it evokes. His website. 
Curt Sissom When Sissom isn't composing, he plays bass guitar with DSN, an original rock band from Dallas, Texas, a hard-rocking trio with a fresh alternative edge, in touch with the classic roots of Texas rock. From emotional ballads to hard driving anthems, DSN performs a wide spectrum of styles with each song offering a modern angle on the great rock and roll heritage. Sissom composes and produces MIDI synthesizer music with 21DCO, a virtual ensemble. He is also a fellow broadcaster in the Live365 Network. His website.
 Paul Virzi Paul Virzi was first attracted to stand-up comedy at a very young age. At nine years old, he witnessed Eddie Murphy's RAW in 1987. He became instantly intrigued by the idea of speaking into a microphone and making a crowd of people happy. His universal style allows him to connect with any type of audience. He has performed in New York City at such clubs as the New York Comedy Club, Stand-Up New York, Comic Strip Live, Carolines, The Laugh Factory, and the New York Improv. He is now featured in many of the top comedy clubs across the country, giving audiences an incredibly funny and memorable experience. His website.
|
| The DMCA Stranglehold 
With the urgent need of music and comedy lovers' action concerning the Internet Radio Equality Bill (HR 2060), right now, it may seem like another mountain to climb to even bring up the need for change in the rules of Internet broadcasting. However, we will forge ahead, and do so, because there are things happening that you should know about. By Dianne Lockhart MONTE VISTA, CO-Many people do not know that Internet Radio has been in a chokehold, programming-wise, for years. Here's why. The designers of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act put constraints on Internet radio that regular over-the-air AM and FM stations were excused from. Such as: - Your program must not be part of an "interactive service." For your purposes, this means that you cannot perform sound recordings within one hour of a request by a listener or at a time designated by the listener.
- In any three-hour period, you should not intentionally program more than three songs (and not more than two songs in a row) from the same recording; you should not intentionally program more than four songs (and not more than three songs in a row) from the same recording artist or anthology/box set.
- Continuous looped programs may not be less than three hours long.
- Rebroadcasts of programs may be performed at scheduled times as follows:
- You should not publish advance program guides or use other means to pre-announce when particular sound recordings will be played.
There are a lot of fed-up broadcasters who are sick and tired of the RIAA's control of the music industry, and, specifically, Internet radio. We thought we'd share with you, by his permission, this opinion of the effects of the DMCA on Internet Radio, and possible solutions, below, by a fellow broadcaster at Live365.com. From broadcaster (username dismuke): I actually have a problem with the very notion of a compulsory license - though I agree completely with what you describe as its benefits and that HR 2060 and NOT the DMCA should be our object of focus right now.
My problem with the compulsory license is that it is a rather pathetic and grotesquely unfair way of protecting intellectual property rights. The fact of the matter is that not all owners of intellectual property have similar interests in the marketplace. Indeed, as we have seen, the marketplace interests of the vast majority of intellectual property owners - i.e. the independents - are very much at odds with interests of the RIAA labels. In a free marketplace, everyone is able to battle it out and everything is ultimately decided by what the customers have to say. Under a compulsory license, everything is pretty much determined in advance by a governmental body and the one who wins is usually the one with the largest amount of political pull.
This is exactly what we have seen with the CRB which has set rates at a level that favors the interests of the lowest common denominator recordings of the RIAA labels by basically making it too expensive for broadcasters to stream less famous artists and niche genres and thus depriving them of the valuable Internet radio exposure they have come to depend on. In other words, the CRB basically has set itself up as the agency that exists to protect the interests of the RIAA by keeping emerging competitors from gaining access to the marketplace.
One of the cardinal rights of ownership is the ability to charge whatever price one wishes and is able to voluntarily get. If you make pencils and want to sell them for $100 each and someone is dumb enough to buy them - go for it. Likewise, if a copyright owner wishes to charge $100 per song per listener or to not license his recordings at all - well, that is a major part of ownership and he should have every right to do so. And likewise, we have every right to treat them the same way we would someone who offered to sell us a ten cent pencil for $100.
In reality, however, people do not charge $100 for ordinary pencils. And, unless there happens to be a temporary shortage of certain raw materials, nobody goes around complaining that pencil prices are outrageous and pencil manufacturers are not at each others throats over what price pencils should sell for. The marketplace takes care of that. It ought to do the same thing with regard to what price, if any, broadcasters pay for royalties.
Here is basically what I propose in place of compulsory licensing:
When a sound recording is copyrighted, the automatic default will be that NO license is required for public performance. Copyright holders who are eager for exposure and publicity might consider this to be their very best option - and it certainly will give broadcasters a HUGE incentive to play their material.
Copyright owners who do not wish to allow free public performance of their material have the option of specifying which Performance Rights Organization (PRO) they wish to license their material through - or they have the option of requiring that any license must be granted by the copyright holder exclusively.
Note that I say "which PRO." The notion that SoundExchange should be a monopoly is absurd. If the RIAA wishes to license all of its material through SoundExchange for outrageous rates - then it should be able to do so. But it does NOT have the right to demand that all other copyright holders be forced to either do the same or else give the material away for free. Copyright holders who wish to charge rates that are more reasonable have every right in the world to form their own PRO for such a purpose.
What I also propose is that every sound recording sold carry a notice of the licensing requirements. For example: "Public performance license granted" "Public performance license through SoundExchange" or Public performance through SoundExchange Competitor X or "Must contact copyright holder for public performance license." The Library of Congress would also maintain a database of all recordings under Federal copyright where broadcasters could quickly and easily check the status and licensing requirements of any recording.
Under my proposed system, if the RIAA wished to charge outrageous rates for its material, it would be very easy for broadcasters to identify such recordings and refuse to buy them or include them in their playlists. And it would be very easy for broadcasters to identify those copyright owners who DO want airplay and are willing to either give it away for free or else charge reasonable rates.
Such a system would protect the rights and interests of ALL copyright holders. It also would enable the RIAA to get what it claims to want - the high prices it claims its recordings are worth.
But the fact of the matter is, if such a proposal was put forth, the RIAA would fight it tooth and nail. A free marketplace is the LAST thing they want - because they know they cannot survive in one.
SoundExchange and the RIAA is lying through its teeth when it says that Internet radio airplay does not have value. Who gets airplay and who doesn't is the only thing this royalty battle is about. The RIAA wants to make sure that only the mass market products of the Big Four get Internet airplay - which is why it has tried to use the SoundExchange monopoly to price everyone else out.
If a free market were to come about and the RIAA charged the sort of rates that they have pushed through the CRB - well, Internet stations would have little choice but to pull RIAA recordings and play only those which are more affordable or, at the very least, severely restrict the number of RIAA recordings which are played. What that would do, of course, is give greater airplay and more exposure to those recordings that are not so overpriced. This, of course, would only hasten the RIAA's demise as the extra exposure would enable audiences to discover artists that they most likely would not have otherwise and the RIAA's market share will decline even faster. Their only hope of being competitive in the market for Internet radio airplay would be to lower their prices to rates that make it attractive for stations to play them. The only reason they could get away with charging high prices would be if a recording is a huge hit - but if they don't get airplay on Internet radio, which will very soon replace FM as the medium where musical trends are set, they will not have any huge hits that anyone would be willing to pay high prices for. They will have priced themselves and not their competitors out of the market.
If the RIAA wants to price recordings out of the market for airplay, it should be free to do so - but only with its OWN recordings and not everybody else's. If the RIAA does not wish to participate in Internet radio - well it shouldn't have to. It can stand on the sidelines and become even more obsolete as Internet radio becomes more and more important in people's daily lives and in our culture. But it does NOT have a right to determine the conditions and terms that its emerging competitors must operate under in order for them to participate in the many wonderful things that Internet radio has to offer. Quite frankly, we need a system where the RIAA has to play by the same rules that everybody else does and where it has absolutely no more status or privilege in the eyes of the law and the government than does any other copyright owner.
The notion of a "willing buyer and a willing seller" being determined by a GOVERNMENT PANEL is absurd. Despite the pseudo-free market verbiage, such is NOT a free market approach. A system where the GOVERNMENT determines what prices ought and ought not to be is the premise of communism/socialism and not a free market. I am actually all for prices being set by "willing buyers and willing sellers" - provided that all parties are actually willing. Perhaps certain broadcasters would be willing to pay .0019 cents to stream some recordings - but no broadcaster in his right mind would be willing to play such a price for all recordings as the vast majority simply are not worth that much in terms of attracting audiences. And perhaps the RIAA labels are willing to sell performance rights to their mega hit recordings for .0019 - but no independent artists or niche genre artist in his right mind would be willing to charge that much for airplay for the exact same reason that pencil makers do not charge $100 for an ordinary pencil. If we are going to have a "willing buyer/willing seller" strandard then it actually needs to be decided by willing buyers and willing sellers - i.e. by a free market and NOT by the RIAA on grounds that it has political pull. And webcasters and independent copyright owners should not have to be forced to spend the time, money and energy to go out and acquire their own political pull in order defend themselves from the RIAA political schemes.
The problem with the compulsory license is that it is a "one size fits all" proposition for both copyright holders and broadcasters. As a consequence, the results will never be to everyone's satisfaction: either one side or the other or both will always feel that they are being screwed. In a free market, each player makes his own decision as to what he wants to charge and to pay - and if it does not work out, then only he is to blame. Under a free market, the only party that loses is the RIAA because it is no longer able to use its political pull in order to keep a flood of emerging competitors in check. It will be forced to compete in a marketplace where it has no special advantage over anybody else and is no longer needed or even particularly wanted anymore by either artists, customers or broadcasters. Establish a genuinely free market and the RIAA is toast because, quite frankly, it no longer has anything to offer that other players in the marketplace cannot do better and much more efficiently. Programs of less than one-hour: no more than three times in a two-week period; Programs longer than one hour: no more than four times in any two-week period.
| |
| Meander Listeners | Apr 4, 07 | Apr to date
(details) | Mar
(details) | Since Inception | | Streams Launched: | 371 | 538 | 14494 | 278383 | | Average Listening Time per Launch (minutes:seconds): | 97:53 | 94:57 | 82:17 | 76:25 | | Total Listening Hours (hours:minutes): | 605:17 | 851:29 | 19880:26 | 354617:45 | | Station Page Visits: | 242 | 591 | 8431 | 119109 |
| ------------------------------------------------ Many |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
