Pandora is the way forward but the don't see it this way, the RIAA can't control evolution forever.

---

Originally posted by 13thHouR:

---

Pandora is the way forward but the don't see it this way, the RIAA can't control evolution forever.

---

Ehh, whatever. RIAA just asked them to pay the people who make the music. Pandora and others got in some hoopla about how this is destroying the internet, RIAA is out to kill Net Neutrality, and paying artists for music will cause the destruction of not just modern music, but of the planet itself.

Mighty interesting how all of the sudden Pandora and others are striking deals and now are willing to say that paying artists to use their music won't trigger the apocalypse... and they can still make enough money to more than stay in business.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 13thHouR:

---

Pandora is the way forward but the don't see it this way, the RIAA can't control evolution forever.

---

Ehh, whatever. RIAA just asked them to pay the people who make the music. Pandora and others got in some hoopla about how this is destroying the internet, RIAA is out to kill Net Neutrality, and paying artists for music will cause the destruction of not just modern music, but of the planet itself.

Mighty interesting how all of the sudden Pandora and others are striking deals and now are willing to say that paying artists to use their music won't trigger the apocalypse... and they can still make enough money to more than stay in business.

---

That's an interesting take on it. What really happened is that the labels came up with a negotiating position that asked for more than they even considered reasonable because they knew it would be negotiated down to something they could live with. The webcasters did the same thing. That's how negotiations work. The problem is nobody told the Copyright Royalty Board that and they literally decided to adopt the labels' plan with no modification. Webcasters have always paid the artists. It's built into the language of the DMCA that allows them to operate. The issue that arose has to do with the re-negotiation of rates mandated every few years by the DMCA, not whether they pay royalties to performers.

And I guess you must really be disgusted with radio stations since they don't pay any performance royalties at all.

Since I don't work for AD I don't have to mince words.

atomicxl, if what you stated had a shred of reality in it it would be one thing. I did not see what you stated posted anywhere. I am too lazy to research this stupid topic.

I remember when the slime fought for the artist cut for internet broadcasting. Then when the contract came up for renewal and the artist asked for a fixed percentage of their cut (they didn't even specify an amount) they were told to pound sand. They knew if they got a mumbo jumbo calculated cut the RIAA dreamed up, their take would be 0% of the cut. The public had to watch re-runs. I believe the RIAA is one of the most unethical enities on earth! Atomicxl, why do you wish to defend them?

13thHouR, they have been doing a great job so far at least in the legal arena.

wow that's grate news but you did'nt given MRP