Music labels and radio broadcasters
can't agree on much, including whether radio should be forced to turn
over hundreds of millions dollars a year to pay for the music it
plays. But the two sides can agree on this: Congress should mandate
that FM radio receivers be built into cell phones, PDAs, and other
portable electronics.
The Consumer Electronics Association,
whose members build the devices that would be affected by such a
directive, is incandescent with rage. "The backroom scheme of
the [National Association of Broadcasters] and RIAA to have Congress
mandate broadcast radios in portable devices, including mobile
phones, is the height of absurdity," thundered CEA president
Gary Shapiro. Such a move is "not in our national interest."
"Rather than adapt to the
digital marketplace, NAB and RIAA act like buggy-whip industries that
refuse to innovate and seek to impose penalties on those that do."
But the music and radio industries
say it's a consumer-focused proposition, one that would provide "more
music choices."
A grand bargain
Autumn, "that season of mists
and mellow fruitfulness," approaches, and as Congress returns
soon from recess, it will find its autumn agenda packed with
supplicants who want the government to put its stamp on private
negotiations. Google and Verizon famously released their own
legislative framework on network neutrality earlier this month, and
the broadcasters and music labels are nearing completion on a similar
framework of their own.
In this case, the framework concerns
public performance rights. Radio broadcasters and music labels are at
each other's throats over the question of whether radio ought to pay
performance rights to labels or artists when it plays their music on
the air (currently, only songwriters get paid, not artists or
labels). A bill percolating in Congress, the Performance Rights Act,
would rationalize performance rights in the US; satellite radio and
webcasters currently pay full performance fees to labels or artists,
but radio does not, thanks to a longstanding exemption in copyright
law.
The bill has already passed out of
committee in both the House and Senate, but it is vigorously opposed
by the broadcasters; they argue that radio provides valuable
promotion to artists and shouldn't have to pay. Congress tried to
force two of the main lobbying groups, the National Association of
Broadcasters and musicFIRST (RIAA is a member), to hash out a
solution last November. None was forthcoming, but talks have
continued since then and are now close to completion.
The two sides hope to strike a grand
bargain: radio would agree to pay around $100 million a year (less
than it feared), but in return it would get access to a larger market
through the mandated FM radio chips in portable devices.<br>
<br>
"As regards the chip, this is a
key issue for the radio industry," musicFIRST told Ars today.
"musicFIRST, too, likes FM chips in cell phones, PDAs, etc. It
gives consumers access to more music choices."
As the contours of this deal came
into sight last week, the consumer electronics companies saw the
prospect of a new government mandate, and one that was transparently
about propping up a particular (and aging) business model.
"The performance royalty
legislation voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee does not
include this onerous and backward-looking radio requirement,"
said the CEA's Shapiro, and he wants to keep it that way.
The deal has not been finalized,
we're told. When it is, the two sides still need to convince Congress
to go along, but they're hopeful something can be wrapped up late
this year or early in 2011.
Update: NAB stresses to us that no
deal has been finalized. "However, if there is a decision made
by the Board of Directors to go forward and seek legislation,
including radio-enabled chips in mobile devices in possible
legislation seems to us to be a reasonable idea," says NAB's
Dennis Wharton.
As for the CEA criticism, "It's
no surprise that CEA opposes this, since trade associations generally
always oppose new rules. CEA also opposed DTV tuners in digital
television sets; the FCC decided that having DTV tuners in TV sets
was a good thing, and passed a rule that gave consumers access to
local TV stations on DTV sets.
"We would argue that having
radio capability on cell phones and other mobile devices would be a
great thing, particularly from a public safety perspective. There are
few if any technologies that match the reliability of broadcast radio
in terms of getting lifeline information to the masses."
|