<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v5.11.81 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Mon, 28 May 2012 12:56:16 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>News You Can Use</title><link>http://www.soundadvicemanagement.com/news2011/</link><description></description><lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:38:04 +0000</lastBuildDate><copyright></copyright><language>en-US</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v5.11.81 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>Important notice from NARAS RE: Sirius</title><dc:creator>Kimball</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 19:36:51 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.soundadvicemanagement.com/news2011/2011/10/27/important-notice-from-naras-re-sirius.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">714783:12714551:13489373</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Dear Recording Academy Member:</p>
<p>It has come to our attention that satellite broadcaster Sirius/XM is seeking to bypass the standard system of paying royalties.&nbsp; If they are allowed to do so, it will likely result in substantially reduced payments to artists and producers, a lowering of the value of performance royalties, and unnecessary conflict between artists and their labels.</p>
<p><span>What&rsquo;s the&nbsp;issue:<span>&nbsp;</span></span></p>
<p>Currently, satellite radio pays sound recording performance royalties to the nonprofit collective&nbsp;SoundExchange, which in turn pays 50% to the artists on the recording and 50% to the copyright owner (usually a record label).&nbsp;&nbsp;SoundExchangepays the artists the full 50%, even if the artist has&nbsp;unrecouped&nbsp;royalty balances, and also pays producers their share as directed by the artist.&nbsp; The system has resulted in an important new income stream for creators.</p>
<p>Sirius is now seeking to use the option of direct licensing with certain independent labels instead of using the system created by Congress that ensures fair payment to all parties.&nbsp; Artists should be concerned about direct licensing; 100% of the royalties would be paid to the record label which in turn may pay artists at a lower rate, subject to recoupment.&nbsp; And labels should be concerned as well; the lower rate being offered could have the effect of lowering the value of performance royalties to all parties.</p>
<p>What you can do:</p>
<p><em>If you are an artist signed to the independent label&hellip;</em></p>
<p>You can call your label today and request that it not direct license your recordings.&nbsp; In the interest of fairness and transparency, your label should continue to license through&nbsp;SoundExchange.</p>
<p><em>If you own or manage an independent label&hellip;</em></p>
<p><em>&nbsp;</em></p>
<p>It is in your interest to refrain from direct licensing.&nbsp; While Sirius may be offering positive terms, the long-term effect of accepting a rate lower than the compulsory rate could be to reduce rates overall in the future.&nbsp; Creating downward pressure on the value of music may be good for Sirius/XM, but it&rsquo;s bad for artists and labels.&nbsp; Please see the following statement from the American Association of Independent Music:&nbsp;http://a2im.org/2011/08/09/statutory-rates-versus-direct-licenses-for-digital-music-streaming/</p>
<p>Thank you for considering this important matter to further our goals of ensuring creators&nbsp;are&nbsp;compensated fairly and the value of music is protected.</p>
<p>Kind regards,&nbsp;</p>
<p>Neil&nbsp;Portnow</p>
<p>President/CEO</p>
<p>The Recording Academy</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.soundadvicemanagement.com/news2011/rss-comments-entry-13489373.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>
