» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: The Performance Rights Act
Written By: Echo Nomad on 05/07/09 at 12:41 am
Content Removed
Subject: Re: The Performance Rights Act
Written By: Below Average Dave on 05/07/09 at 1:02 am
http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/10381/549087.html
Currently there is a new piece of legislation out which if passed requires AM\FM broadcasters to pay artists per song play. Currently radio stations only pay royalites to writers and producers licensed by companies such as BMI- etc. Proponents such as the RIAA and MusicFirst say that radio stations have been pirating music and making money on it since the beginning of radio. Opponents may say that the songs they play are in reality free advertisements for the artists who depend on radio for the exposure. So who's right and what should or shouldn't be done?
I tend to disagree with the RIAA almost always. I mean, radio has gotten so bad I guess I don't really care, but without the radio/MTV I would have never heard of Green Day, Madonna, Britney Spears, Led Zeppelin, Linkin Park, The Beatles, Elvis Presley, No Doubt or any of the other many artists whose CDs I bought, The Record Industry has likely made far more off radio than radio has off it. . .