Electronics and Entertainment regulations needed

Electronics and Entertainment regulations needed

 

I think President Obama has to it is imperative that he organizes a panel of experts in Law and Technology and resolve the differences that if not addressed will destroy the American way.  We are still the leaders of the entertainment world, but left unaddressed this too can become history.  Why?  First of all, let it be said that HR 848 is just an idea and not the solution to the slumping recording industry. It only duly recognizes that the recording industry is in fact in trouble and can go under.

 

As the music industry and entertainment industry has crept and crawled still meeting the standards of the old ways of doing business while the electronics industry has moved forward in leaps and bounds.  We have a caveman entertainment regulated industry going up against a supercomputer and mankind is losing out to machine, when the intended purpose of machines was to assist and not replace man.

 

There is not much that the average consumer cannot do with the home Personal Computer.  As we are worried about North Korea and nuclear missiles we should be worried about the little computer wiz kid, with his hand on the right processor, memory, and storage space and internet access flying unmanned planes over populated cities.  That said!

 

Entertainment has to quickly catch up to the electronics industry, from levying blank CD’s as done in other countries like Canada to support the record industry to removing MP-3 Players from the category of computer peripherals, to taxing each GB of storage space on digital devices like MP-3 Players, I-Pods and even digital phones, because the amount of storage space on these devices have become too cheap and are manufactured at unnecessary capacities.

 

Even things like what is celebrity status has to be addresses, even a horse can retire.  As I realize there is a difference between popular and famous, the paparazzi are not held up to any standards in their exploitation.  I mean is a celebrity a name and institution or personality or do all unfairly applied?  My argument is that a celebrity is an institution with a name and not a real character but is a public image.  I just think that after so many years of fame due to celebrity status fame may no longer mean popular and the real individual should be able to opt out and regain their private lives as untouchable celebrity status.  The whole system is jacked up!

 

I mean people like Michael and Janet Jackson, Prince, even Paul McCarthy and Mick Jagger just cannot refrain from entertainment because the cost of their status is too high.

HR 848 should be modified

HR 848 should be modified

 

According to a government web site HR 848 would take in an annual amount of $500 Million, therefore we have a $500 Million issue at hand.  According to research done by CNET News in 2005 about 11% of the US population owned an I-Pod or MP-3 player weighing in at about 22 million adults.  It has to be double that by 2009 end.

 

Now they are very cheap to buy, you can get an 8 GB Sony Walkman MP-3/MP-4 Player at J&R Computer World today for $99.99.  It will play both audio and video here is the hyperlink Sony NWZ-E438FBLK 8GB Walkman®.  This digital device will hold a complete album using only 60 MB, therefore it can hold over 120 albums and we wonder why record sales are down.

 

There is a simple solution for the recoup by record companies that does not require more taxes on Americans directly.  We can simply add a tariff on MP-3 and i-Pods imports at $1 per GB of storage space, therefore the $99.99 8 GB MP-3 player would cost $110, which is chump change to the consumer. That alone would bring in over $500 Million per year.

 

We can spread the playing field by allowing the royalties to be shared by artist as well as we share the income for the storage space taxes on digital media players.  My solution is not to create a new bowl but to split the old bowl contrary to HR 848 and create a new bowl in taxiing storage space on digital media devices

 

What you think?

 

Snapshot of HR 848 Performance Royalties

Snapshot of HR 848 Performance Royalties

 

 

A bill is proposed legislation and an act is legislation put into effect, a bill has to be passed into law to become an act.

 

Summary of Introduced bill on 4 Feb 2009

Performance Rights Act – Amends federal copyright law to:
(1) grant performers of sound recordings equal rights to compensation from terrestrial broadcasters;
(2) establish a flat annual fee in lieu of payment of royalties for individual terrestrial broadcast stations with gross revenues of less than $1.25 million and for noncommercial, public broadcast stations;
(3) grant an exemption from royalty payments for broadcasts of religious services and for incidental uses of musical sound recordings; and
(4) grant terrestrial broadcast stations that make limited feature uses of sound recordings a per program license option. Prohibits taking into account license fees payable for public performance via digital audio transmission of sound recordings in any proceeding to set or adjust the license fees for the purpose of reducing or adversely affecting such license fees. (Current law prohibits taking those fees into account in such a proceeding without referencing the purpose.) Prohibits anything in this Act from adversely affecting the public performance rights or royalties payable to songwriters or copyright owners of musical works. Prohibits taking into account the rates established by the Copyright Royalty Judges in any proceeding to reduce or adversely affect the license fees payable for public performances by terrestrial broadcast stations. Requires that such license fees for the public performance of musical works be independent of license fees paid for the public performance of sound recordings. Revises provisions relating to proceeds from the licensing of transmissions.

Order of moving along bill

Feb 04, 2009: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E202-203)

Feb 04, 2009: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary

Mar 10, 2009: Committee Hearings Held.

May 13, 2009: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held

Added to calendar on May 13, 2009: Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 21 – 9.

Voted by the House

Voted by the Senate

Signed by the President

H.R. 484 May strike down Radio Exemption to Performance Royalties

H.R. 484 May strike down Radio Exemption to Performance Royalties

 

I am not doing anything out of the ordinary or extraordinary.  I am just hoping Janet might perform one show for AllGood Entertainment; I do not want a long drawn out court lawsuit, by Patrick Allocco.  Michael said he would do the show when he comes from London, Janet is working on a new album.  I just took it on my own to act as a mediator between MJJ and Patrick, I might have committed Janet prematurely, but the show would help record sales, she can do her best songs and record the performance and make an agreement to use them to promote her album saving costs on music videos.  The arrangement is all good if all we get is the retainer and access to the film for future exploitation.  In other words instead of paying to make videos will get paid to make an extravaganza, that can be used to exploit our material.

 

I understand that  ASACP, BMI, and SASAC Americas Performance Rights Organizations (PRO’s) proposed a bill through Rep. John Conyers to go up on the rates to play music over the radio airwaves, I do not know if that includes internet radio, I am searching for this information and will report on this in the future.  Radio personalities are upset with this change.  The House Bill will strike down radio exemption of performance rights. Under H.R. 484 if passed many black radio personalities think it my harm the radio industry.  The issue is about putting some more money in the artists pockets.

 

It might work out, I am a member of ASCAP and I know recording artist are not selling music like the old days and radio airplay is my number one source of music listening.  You will find that most people listen to the radio hours every day.  So if this is true, it might not be all unethical or bad but a good thing, it would simply require a slight increase in fess by commercials aired on the radio and if it applies to internet radio and it should it would protect the radio industry from unfair competition.  Basically it is a new tax across the economic board and the radio stations will not carry the burden alone.

 

Performance Rights

Click above to learn what performing rights are

 

Performing rights are the right to perform music in public. It is part of copyright law and demands payment to the music’s composer/lyricist and publisher (with the royalties generally split 50/50 between the two.

 

You may be of the opinion that there are no limits, and generally speaking you may be right, but with Saturn turning direct on your birthday this year it will pay you to know how far you can go without provoking a negative reaction. Far enough, but not too far!

You may have to cut back on social activities and focus more on your home life this week but it won’t cause you any great hardship. Partners and loved ones need your assistance and you will jump at the chance to do your self-sacrifice bit.