What People Think
 |
 |
42% For, 58% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
S. 2500, The Performance Rights Act (2 comments ↓)
S. 2500 would provide fair compensation to artists for use of their sound recordings.
()
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_SN_2500.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Dan DeBruler
The unasked question around the Performance Rights Act “How much additional income will an artist actually receive?”
Out of the tens of thousands of recording artists who will conceivably be covered under the legislation, how can any artist expect to receive a fair share? As a radio station manager, I am asking for a closer look at the practicality of the Performance Rights Act, which will ultimately benefit the legal counsel and employees of the collection agency to a greater extent than it will any performing artist.
If the law passes, we will make every attempt to negotiate individual fees with artists we actually play. That would provide a fair share, and offer radio the opportunity to work out a “willing buyer, willing seller” agreement both parties could live with.
Tony
I fell that this bill is going to end free radio. the radio companies are not reporting great profits. I see that the amount of revenue generated looks like alot, but the cost to run a broadcast company must not be cheap. what is the profit of the broadcast companies. i will back this bill if the profits are great. Satellite radio charges there listener and this is why I feel that they should pay. Now on the other hand I don’t agree on internet stations having to pay, unless they are charging there listeners.