Musicians, radio and performance rights bills: should musicians get paid through radio broadcast?

[troubleman84]

Yesterday, a session of rock and soul music legends from Sheryl Crow to Dionne Warwick to Herbie Hancock and Patti LaBelle protested to Congress that they needed to get paid a fair amount of performance right royalties by radio stations who play their music. This was addressed after several bills made through the RIAA, AFTRA and the musicFIRST coalition was introduced to the halls in hopes they will get paid royalties that record labels FAILED to pay them.

I have a question, do you think it'll be a right move to give artists performance royalties especially to those who don't necessarily write, produce and/or publish their recordings or should they go after the RIAA should the bills fail to get through Congress?

And do you think if it does get passed, then that'll mean an end to their careers should this pass and they REFUSE to pay them? LOL

Let me know...

 

[DuranDuran]

I have a question, do you think it'll be a right move to give artists performance royalties especially to those who don't necessarily write, produce and/or publish their recordings or should they go after the RIAA should the bills fail to get through Congress?

And do you think if it does get passed, then that'll mean an end to their careers should this pass and they REFUSE to pay them? LOL

Records sell or songs are popular because of the performance of a singer/group, not who wrote it. The average person doesn't care about if an act writes or not or about who wrote it. People don't pay to see a songwriter or producer in concert, but a musical act. Anyway in a lot of cases the songs on the radio tend to be there because the record company paid the station or DJ money (payola or "promotion"). In the past, labels have also paid stations not to play records (usually by an act that defected from a label to another). Some labels even bought a lot of their own records to spike the charts. Today the DJ has no say over what is played, unless they run an underground station, and they usually don't play mainstream acts.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

have a question, do you think it'll be a right move to give artists performance royalties especially to those who don't necessarily write, produce and/or publish their recordings or should they go after the RIAA should the bills fail to get through Congress?

they do anyway dont they? isnt this issue about record labels who fail to pay the artist.artists have always received performance royalties. thats what the whole 50- 75 year thing was about interms of performance royalties stopping after that amount of time

 

[mistermaxxx]

artists need a fair union but that ain't gonna happen. the Music business has Enron acts for years and shall continue to because they have a selective monopoly on the industry. artists should get all they can, but what they should get and whatnot isn't always in the cards. good question though.

 

[144000]

Records sell or songs are popular because of the performance of a singer/group, not who wrote it. The average person doesn't care about if an act writes or not or about who wrote it. People don't pay to see a songwriter or producer in concert, but a musical act. Anyway in a lot of cases the songs on the radio tend to be there because the record company paid the station or DJ money (payola or "promotion"). In the past, labels have also paid stations not to play records (usually by an act that defected from a label to another). Some labels even bought a lot of their own records to spike the charts. Today the DJ has no say over what is played, unless they run an underground station, and they usually don't play mainstream acts.

i agree with what you are saying about the industry, but the songwriters do have a say in what people buy. after all, Clay Aiken has a great voice, but he's not doing that well, because he doesn't have great songs. Mariah Carey did better in the first part of her career because she had better songs. Michael Jackson defies all odds and does well after not performing for a long time, and not having his latest stuff played on the radio, and having media try to tarnish his image, but still having fans chase him...because of the power of his songwriting. but thanks for reminding us of the real reason why record labels are falling..because of karma...due to their corrupt ways.

 

[DuranDuran]

Clay Aiken doesn't sell because he's "major cheesy" to the youth market. Being homosexual doesn't help either, unless he's planning to make acid house music or something. Today, an act has to be "hard" and "keep it real". That's why hip-hop is the most popular (at least in the USA). Anyway, you don't have to have good songs to sell. Ringtone songs like "Laffy Taffy" aren't any good but are popular. Songs like "Barbie Girl" or "Me So Horny" aren't great either, but were big hits.

 

[144000]

Clay Aiken doesn't sell because he's "major cheesy" to the youth market. Being homosexual doesn't help either, unless he's planning to make acid house music or something. Today, an act has to be "hard" and "keep it real". That's why hip-hop is the most popular (at least in the USA). Anyway, you don't have to have good songs to sell. Ringtone songs like "Laffy Taffy" aren't any good but are popular. Songs like "Barbie Girl" or "Me So Horny" aren't great either, but were big hits.

well...there are a lot of homosexuals and the bottom line is, Clay's voice is spectacular...and..people differ on their opinions of the acts u spoke of..so...lol...it's just as much the songs as the acts. elton john is homosexual and doesn't have an edge. i went to see him close to seven years ago, and he had to stop in the middle of a song and start over, cus he felt he didn't do it right. but many many people still go to see him. he has classic songs. the main definition of a good song is an inescapable hook. that's all u really need. and those hooks are inescapable, no matter how one's tastes are. lol. i mean..u remembered them, didn't you? lol

 

[DuranDuran]

Elton John debuted in the 70s, not today. Elton also married a woman (like Rock Hudson) and was in the closet when he 1st came out. Before the "gangsta" image took hold, being homosexual (or at least androgynous) wasn't as much of an issue. Look at what happened to Tevin Campbell, and later George Michael (who was bisexual, but pretended to be straight. George said in an interview after being arrested that he hadn't been with a woman since around 1987). There was a group at Motown in the 1970's called The Dynamic Superiors who had an openly gay lead singer named Tony Washington. Motown mainly marketed them to the gay audience (as they didn't know what to do with them), even though they sang the same type of material as other soul groups like The Sylistics or The Spinners. They appeared on Soul Train and Don Cornelious didn't interview the group, the only time that happened on the show. There was also Sylvester, but he was disco, which was popular with the homosexual audience anyway. Today's younger mainstream audience won't accept a gay person. If you hear them talk "gay" is slang for something bad. Or they'll praise a same sex person for something, but add "no homo".

 

[144000]

Elton John debuted in the 70s, not today. Elton also married a woman (like Rock Hudson) and was in the closet when he 1st came out. Before the "gangsta" image took hold, being homosexual (or at least androgynous) wasn't as much of an issue. Look at what happened to Tevin Campbell, and later George Michael (who was bisexual, but pretended to be straight. George said in an interview after being arrested that he hadn't been with a woman since around 1987). There was a group at Motown in the 1970's called The Dynamic Superiors who had an openly gay lead singer named Tony Washington. Motown mainly marketed them to the gay audience (as they didn't know what to do with them), even though they sang the same type of material as other soul groups like The Sylistics or The Spinners. They appeared on Soul Train and Don Cornelious didn't interview the group, the only time that happened on the show. There was also Sylvester, but he was disco, which was popular with the homosexual audience anyway. Today's younger mainstream audience won't accept a gay person. If you hear them talk "gay" is slang for something bad. Or they'll praise a same sex person for something, but add "no homo".

hmmm.well...i don't get all that, cus now we get into a discussion that is another topic..whether or not gay is a new alternative or somn people are born with...

still...Elton is playing at las vegas these days, to sold out crowds. lol. in the end..people forget what they're looking at when they get caught up in a great song..

neyo..i first saw him and thought he was gangsta..then it turns out he was the gentleman who only sang. but i hated most of the songs he wrote for himself. and liked but not loved the stuff he wrote for beyonce, so i wrote him off. but now he has this song called 'mad'. and i forget everything. i don't care whether it's from neyo or not. i just love the song. and i give radio big ratings cus i listen every time it's on. and, then there's the account told on this site about a fan who played songs from Invincible for some people who weren't converted. they didn't know it was Michael..but they loved the songs. then the fan said it was Michael and they all bought a copy of the cd. but it was important that they loved the songs first.

george michael hasn't put out nearly as many great songs as elton and hasn't reminded us of the few good ones he has put out. elton keeps reminding people of his classics by playing them in concert regualarly. and Michael's songs are so great that he doesn't have to do anything. lol

 

[DuranDuran]

hmmm.well...i don't get all that, cus now we get into a discussion that is another topic

Clay Aiken & Elton John have nothing to do with the topic either, lol, which is whether acts should get paid for having their songs played on the radio.

 

[144000]

Clay Aiken & Elton John have nothing to do with the topic either, lol, which is whether acts should get paid for having their songs played on the radio.

lol..i think i was on track cus i was discussing the value of songs vs. artists..lol,,,and that nobody looks for an excuse to not spend money if they like the songs. and that could have something to do with discussing why the companies see the value of songwriting. not that the artists are not valuable, but they'd be all having to try to sing from a phone book if not for original music. clay needs songwriters elton does not. the gay natural or alternative debate is already a topic in gen. disc.

 

[DuranDuran]

lol..i think i was on track cus i was discussing the value of songs vs. artists..lol,,,and that nobody looks for an excuse to not spend money if they like the songs. and that could have something to do with discussing why the companies see the value of songwriting. not that the artists are not valuable, but they'd be all having to try to sing from a phone book if not for original music. clay needs songwriters elton does not. the gay natural or alternative debate is already a topic in gen. disc.

But Elton doesn't write lyrics, only music. That would be Bernie Taupin.

 

[Sdeidjs]

In my opinion, yes they should be "fairly" compensated for their talent.

Radio Stations, Nite Clubs, Sports Clubs ect. do pay a yearly license fee to be permited to play music. entertsinment in their facilities, establishments.

BMI.com



Broadcast Music, Inc. was founded 60 years ago on the idea that all songwriters, composers and publishers have the right to be paid for the use of their intellectual property no ...

• www.bmi.com
• · Cached page

:angel:Knowledge IS Growth...Edication Is The Key~~~

 

[144000]

But Elton doesn't write lyrics, only music. That would be Bernie Taupin.

yes...but lol...he's still a cowriter. still a writer. they are one. they obviously needed each other. and funeral for a friend almost is totally musical..and he's written instrumentals.

 

[DuranDuran]

In my opinion, yes they should be "fairly" compensated for their talent.

Radio Stations, Nite Clubs, Sports Clubs ect. do pay a yearly license fee to be permited to play music. entertsinment in their facilities, establishments.

BMI.com



Broadcast Music, Inc. was founded 60 years ago on the idea that all songwriters, composers and publishers have the right to be paid for the use of their intellectual property no ...

• www.bmi.com
• · Cached page

:angel:Knowledge IS Growth...Edication Is The Key~~~

Performers are supposed to get paid for radio play, jukebox revenue, karaoke, use in commercials, video channel play, etc. but it usually never happens. Labels have ripped off artists since the inception of recorded music.

 

[144000]

i think the difficulty comes in remakes. what if several artists remake the same song. i hear there were three hundred or more remakes of 'yesterday' by the beatles. how many performers should be paid for them? it's probably easier to pay the writer.

 

[DuranDuran]

i think the difficulty comes in remakes. what if several artists remake the same song. i hear there were three hundred or more remakes of 'yesterday' by the beatles. how many performers should be paid for them? it's probably easier to pay the writer.

Actually, it's over 2,600 versions. It's supposed to be the most covered song ever. I think White Christmas was 2nd place. The performer should be paid for their version, they can also be paid extra if they use a different arrangement. The songwiter/s still get their royalties, unless they had one of those sham deals, where the record companies get all of the publishing. Motown had a lot of their acts record the same songs. A famous version is "I Heard It Through The Grapevine". The Miracles were the 1st to record it, but theirs was just an album track. Marvin Gaye recorded a version, but went unreleased because it failed in one Motown's "quality control" voting sessions. Gladys Knight & The Pips released their version, which became a big hit. A year after that, Marvin's was finally released as a single, which Gladys did not appreciate. Marvin's became the biggest record to be released by the label.

 

[troubleman84]

^^ Norman Whitfield tried so damn hard to get Motown to release that song with Marvin. He wasn't really too fond of Gladys' version though because he wanted Marvin's out. Gladys said she and The Pips came to Motown at a very bad time anyways.

 

[MsMo]

...

I have a question, do you think it'll be a right move to give artists performance royalties especially to those who don't necessarily write, produce and/or publish their recordings or should they go after the RIAA should the bills fail to get through Congress?

And do you think if it does get passed, then that'll mean an end to their careers should this pass and they REFUSE to pay them? LOL

Let me know...

I heard about that too and I think it's high time the performer got a cut of the royalties. They should have gotten a share all along. If they had, a lot of, for example, Motown artists wouldn't have died broke and others could have taken the time to enjoy the work they put in, (like Michael) in their later years instead of having to continue touring to earn a living.

I really think it's gonna pass, but if it doesn't, I think it will just be business as usual for the newest performers and some of the seasoned ones will look for alternative routes like Prince & others have done and/or demand contracts that make up for what they could be getting.

 

[Bob George]

I don't know enough about the bill being proposed but it sounds like something that would hurt artists rather than help them. I think radio stations will play their songs less is they have to pay the performer more to play their songs. You can just imagine that the more regulations and restrictions are placed on the recording industry by the government, the worse it's going to be for artists. They have to realise, they aren't the boss. They work for record companies, the record companies own them. They just look pretty and sing the songs. Beggers can't be choosers. I'm sick of these divas in the music industry who think they run the show and the world owes them everything. All anyone owes you is the lousy 10c per record sale that you're lucky to be getting. So just shut up and deal with it or get off your arse and write, produce, record and distribute your own shit so you get more money. How about that for a bright idea?

 

[144000]

I heard about that too and I think it's high time the performer got a cut of the royalties. They should have gotten a share all along. If they had, a lot of, for example, Motown artists wouldn't have died broke and others could have taken the time to enjoy the work they put in, (like Michael) in their later years instead of having to continue touring to earn a living.

I really think it's gonna pass, but if it doesn't, I think it will just be business as usual for the newest performers and some of the seasoned ones will look for alternative routes like Prince & others have done and/or demand contracts that make up for what they could be getting.

Michael doesn't have to tour.

I don't know enough about the bill being proposed but it sounds like something that would hurt artists rather than help them. I think radio stations will play their songs less is they have to pay the performer more to play their songs. You can just imagine that the more regulations and restrictions are placed on the recording industry by the government, the worse it's going to be for artists. They have to realise, they aren't the boss. They work for record companies, the record companies own them. They just look pretty and sing the songs. Beggers can't be choosers. I'm sick of these divas in the music industry who think they run the show and the world owes them everything. All anyone owes you is the lousy 10c per record sale that you're lucky to be getting. So just shut up and deal with it or get off your arse and write, produce, record and distribute your own shit so you get more money. How about that for a bright idea?

i have to agree. equilibrium is in place now. performers get all the long end of the stick in the beginning including the stardom. writers have to struggle most of their lives just to find a performer, and then they have to get resourceful. they deserve to have their latter end dividends.