7-25-13
Democrat Melvin Watt of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet plans to introduce performance tax legislation next week that may have an impact on radio stations across the country. Here are some of the comments Watt made at a hearing on "Innovation in America: The Role of Copyrights." "One area where copyright law has strayed from both our Constitutional foundations and international norms concerns the recognition of a performance right in sound recordings. I, and other members of this panel, have long advocated, and have the scars to show for it, for a correction of this historical anomaly. That is why today I am announcing my intention to circulate to my colleagues and inviting them to join me as original cosponsors of a bill that simply recognizes a performance right in sound recordings before the August recess. I believe that doing so will highlight how the law can take the wrong turn if policymakers fail to embrace the principles embodied in the Constitutional protection of intellectual property."
Here is the entire text of Watt's speech at the hearing:
In my mind, a comprehensive review starts with a fundamental appreciation of the Constitutional foundations of copyright law and policy. By reexamining the first principles that gave life to copyright protection, we can better develop policy that ensures that those principles are honored. Today?s panel represents individual authors and creators from diverse segments of America that rely on copyright. It is not only helpful, but important that we hear directly from creators on how copyright law and policy is working for them.
There can be little doubt that creativity and innovation are at an apex in the 21st century and that many economic interests are intertwined with the interests and livelihoods of creators. But copyright law and policy should not be about preserving existing business models. Nor should it be about accommodating emerging business models. Ensuring that the intellectual labor of our creative communities is appropriately stimulated and compensated will guarantee that the public will continue to benefit from the enrichment the creators provide.
Recognizing that policy should develop around the creator is sometimes easier said than done. We would be na?ve to not acknowledge that there are entrenched interests that cannot be disregarded in this review. But a careful examination of the constitutional and historical underpinnings of U.S. copyright law is a start.
My vision of this comprehensive review also includes an assessment of the international copyright framework. Appreciating that framework in this global, digital environment will equip us with a better understanding of how best to reinforce our constitutional objectives. It also provides perspective on how and why our policies have developed historically and where and why those policies may have gone astray.
One area where copyright law has strayed from both our constitutional foundations and international norms concerns the recognition of a performance right in sound recordings. I, and other members of this panel have long advocated, and have the scars to show for it, for a correction of this historical anomaly. That is why today I am announcing my intention to circulate to my colleagues and inviting them to join me as original cosponsors of a bill that simply recognizes a performance right in sound recordings before the August recess. I believe that doing so will highlight how the law can take the wrong turn if policymakers fail to embrace the principles embodied in the Constitutional protection of intellectual property.
The story of performance rights, although related to the field of music, is instructive in other areas of copyright as well. As we continue our comprehensive review of copyright, I think that story is a compelling one ? one that reflects a departure from centering policy development on the intellectual labors of the artists and responding instead to market forces that, while relevant, should not be in a position to completely extinguish rights recognized and honored internationally.
The real-world impact for American musical artists is not only extreme, it?s unfair. It denies them access to performance rights royalties already earned offshore. These funds sit unclaimed due to our inability to simply afford these artists what they deserve?legal recognition of a performance right. I think as we continue our review, we will see that in other areas as well, when we have robust protections for the rights of the creators, this will incentivize the parties to negotiate in good faith, enter into compensation agreements domestically, and heighten the public?s access and enjoyment of the products of the creative community.
(7/25/2013 6:34:42 PM)
Colleagues....did you notice this line? "...The story of performance rights, although related to the field of music, is instructive in other areas of copyright as well..." This sinister reference is about books, pictures, doodling, sketches, even your moms apple pie recipe. I propose this deal? If we have to pay, then artists pay US a cut of "everything" they make (Forever). Seems fair to me. (7/25/2013 5:48:46 PM)
We are a stand alone AM station that is doing very well and only play about 10 to 14 songs per day and under the new "better" RMLC plan we now have to pay almost double the monthly fees to BMI and ASCAP. It is unbelievable. It is a scam. Nobody cares about the little guy and that becomes more evident every day.
(7/25/2013 5:32:30 PM)
If this continues, small radio stations such as mine will be out of business. Profits are already low, we already pay BMI,SESAC and others monthly fees. The ARTIST/STARS would not exist if it were not for radio. Record reps from the big companies and independent record reps tie up my phone lines every week asking my program director to play their artist. Please stop the bleeding now !
(7/25/2013 5:21:54 PM)
Our sponsor has also been nominated to take over running Freddie & Fannie so he's not even beholden to his own constituency ... a great candidate for guerilla legislation sponsor, eh?
(7/25/2013 5:18:41 PM)
This has moe to do with the latter than the former. It ain't so much about performance as it is tax. Our sponsor has never met a tax he didn't like, "and has the scars to prove it". Too bad he's not as compassionate about good stewardship of the revenue already being collected. But that comment is probably raaaaaacist, right?
Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend
