As more context and information comes out about the recent 'webcaster-RIAA settlement', which this article points out, among other things, was between 9 labels and 200 streams all owned by the same company, thus agreeing to pay itself, it becomes clear where this is all going.
"A comment by the RIAA attorney Gary Greenstein at a recent meeting with the Webcaster Alliance - representing a range of netcasters, including the smaller 'casters and nonprofits - puts AOL's strategy into perspective. The meeting took place at the RIAA's office on January 29. According to two people present at the meeting, Greenstein explained that the RIAA didn't care if 25,000 webcasters in the US went out of business because AOL streams 200 channels of music, and the streaming media listener would then have to get their music from AOL. And AOL pays its bill to the RIAA."
So, since AOL happily pays itself, they can be the basis of an agreement that no one who is really affected by this agreement wants? Isn't this a little like Yahoo being the basis of the original recommendation to the LoC, when Yahoo had run away from the business and was no longer paying anything? The article goes on to repeat much of what has been said, and ignored, for the last year and a half(or at least it feels like that and more). the RIAA has cleared up the real logic of why they want the webcasters, specifically the small ones, shut down by exorbitant rates, they want the market commercialized and shrunken to the point of controllability, thus making them far more money. The scary thing is that AOL also owns WinAmp and Shoutcast, 2 main tools in smaller webcasting.
Leave a comment