if a broadcaster monetizes their broadcasts, then it’s only fair that performers get a cut of the profits… but it’s a delicate ecosystem. it’s important to support artists, but it’s just as important that broadcast vehicles (radio, internet, etc.) are healthy as well, otherwise those businesses will close shop.

and if a songwriter cuts an album and no one is exposed to it… was it ever really cut?

artist dreams of becoming of mega-stars, playing to sold out arenas and touring the world have been tempered by the realities of modern day perceived *value* of music. people just aren’t willing to spend the money they used to on music — whether it be recorded or live.

as long as both sides realize they need one another to survive, a smart deal can be made. let’s just hope it’s not modeled to the interests of made stars and traditional broadcasters. there’s a whole line of up and coming artists and business models whose existance depends on these negotiations.

True C-Dog, but like professional sports, the labels need to realize they have nothing without the talent and that the multi-channel licensing money needs to be spread around more evenly.

that goes without saying, b-did. the labels are always looking to pillage the potential coffers of talent. it’s the relationship between talent creating art and broadcasters exposing art that i’d like to see more carefully navigated and negotiated.

unfortunately, the labels, ASCAP, BMI and SESAC have a bunch of their own self-interest caught up in the mix.