Urgent Messages from the Mentals by George Ziemann -- January 29, 2008 Most of the industry's talking heads seem to disappear about Thanksgiving or so, disappearing from the public eye until sometime around the end of January, when they wake up from their winter slumber to give each other awards and emphasize to everyone, just in case you forgot, that the pirates are stealing their stuff. We begin with the Tech Corner from the RIAA's January newsletter, which they lifted from the San Jose Mercury News. It's a speech by Mitch Bainwol that happened in Vegas and should have stayed in Vegas. I'm not going to quote it all. Just the funny parts. He starts out by calling last year "challenging." Bainwol has optimism for the future of the industry because of the "enduring quality and appeal of music." Like the industry has anything to do with it. And that's not even the funny part. "These digital distribution platforms present untold new opportunities for artists to better connect with their fans. And in an online world where nearly 3 million new bands clamor for attention on sites like MySpace, the need for a record label to help find, nurture, promote, market and recommend artists to specific audiences is greater than ever." The need for a record label is greater than ever? Nurture? I've talked to a lot of artists about record labels. The word "nurture" has never been on the list of qualities anyone used to describe their record label. Then there's a pile of positive spin on the "exponential growth in the digital music marketplace," and how wonderful it all is. The industry used to collect a billion $10 bills a year. Now they collect a half billion $10 notes and two billion $1 bills. That's more than twice as many sales. So you can see how Bainwol can be optimistic. Music consumption may be up, but the share of that consumption that is illegal continues to be alarmingly high and compromises the industry's ability to invest in the new bands of tomorrow. That's what we're hoping for. We're not giving you 85 percent so you can sue the people who listen to us. You know, the 3 million new bands on MySpace? Go away so we can have some fun. We need to continue to address the theft of music in its various forms, and to enlist partners such as Internet Service Providers, universities and technology firms to help in this mutual fight. We need to fully monetize the investment that record labels make in these new digital distribution models. What about the 3 million of us that don't want to be part of your inquisition? If you get paid, we get paid. The public is downloading our stuff, too. We are soberly realistic about the challenges today and ahead. That would be a first. The reason that I brought up the RIAA newsletter, which I was amused at but not enough to comment on it when I first saw it, is how it ties in with the I got from ASCAP today, which is publicly available here. The subject line said "ASCAP Special Message" but what we really have is an Urgent message from Marilyn Bergman. It's so urgent that they waited a day to send it to me. "Today [Jan. 28], the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) begins a hearing that will determine mechanical rates for every songwriter and music publisher in America. It will be critical because, in addition to setting rates for physical products, rates will be set for the first time ever for digital products such as digital downloads, subscription services and ringtones." This is the very fact upon which I based my call for musicians to throw a bunch of cover songs on the net and p2p networks, just to muddy the waters a little more than they already are. "Our friends at The National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA) will be representing the mechanical right interests of songwriters and music publishers in this hearing. They will be fighting vigorously to protect those mechanical right interests to ensure that musical compositions are compensated fairly." Fighting vigorously? To "protect those mechanical right interests"? The imaginary ones that don't actually exist? All musical compositions? Does this include the 3 million new bands at MySpace? Of course, the bigger question would be why ASCAP let the RIAA sell 3 billion songs through iTunes before bringing this up. When the RIAA started suing people, ASCAP was right behind them, cheering them on. When the RIAA wanted webcasting royalties for the sound recording copyright, something traditional U.S. broadcasting services never have paid, and ASCAP/BMI, which are traditionally the ones to step forward and demand publishing/songwriter royalties, pretty much stood there nodding like puppets. But something has changed... "On the other side of this fight stands the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Digital Media Association (DiMA). Both the RIAA and DiMA have proposed significant reductions in mechanical royalty rates that would be disastrous for songwriters and music publishers." ASCAP buddies up to the RIAA. After it gets what it wants, RIAA decides to screw songwriters and music publishers. The publishers are shocked, SHOCKED I say, which is easy to tell because we have exclamation marks. "David Israelite, NMPA President and CEO tells us, 'The current rate for physical phonorecords is 9.1 cents. The RIAA has proposed slashing the rate to approximately 6 cents a song - a cut of more than one-third the current rate!'" It's not like the labels have ever paid the full rate in the first place, but this is a legitimate complaint, if accurate. Despite his over-excitement, it is a perfectly logical, lucid argument. This is pretty amazing in and of itself because, as you will see, this guy is fucking insane. "For permanent digital downloads, NMPA is proposing a rate of 15 cents per track because the costs involved are much less than for physical products." See what I mean? But wait, there's more... "The RIAA has proposed the outrageous rate of approximately 5 to 5.5 cents per track, and DiMA is proposing even less. "For interactive streaming services, which some analysts believe will be the future of the music industry, NMPA is proposing a rate of the greater of 12.5% of revenue, 27.5% of content costs, or a micro-penny calculation based on usage. The RIAA actually proposed that songwriters and music publishers should get the equivalent of .58% of revenue. And DiMA is taking the position that songwriters' and music publishers' mechanical rights should be zero, because DiMA does not believe we have any such rights!" That's because right now, you don't, dumbass. It may be a surprise to you(!!!11eleventy!!!), some of us have given this a lot of thought. Doesn't matter what kind of arrangement you make. We know you aren't going to pay us anyway. Or the three million bands at MySpace. That's the problem. Then Bergman closes with this gem... "Clearly these are perilous times for those of us that create the music that generates profit for those that use our music. But remember this, there would be no profit without our musical compositions that they are fighting to use so freely!" Again with the exclamation points. There's already no profit, Marilyn. Would you rather we ignored you completely? Which brings us to the Grammy Awards. The Writers Guild decided to give the Grammy awards a "waiver" and allow its members to write for the show, seeing as how no one could possibly expect the music industry to put on a show without television writers. Lastly, U2's manager would like to remind you that the damn pirates are stealin' their stuff and they want ISP's to stop the illegal songs or give them some money because Bono is starving, don'cha know? This is a rerun of Bainwol's idea and isn't any better coming out the head of someone who works for U2. To repeat my earlier response: What about the 3 million of us that don't want to be part of your inquisition? If you get paid, we get paid. The public is downloading our stuff, too.