Thanks!

Our partners at the Future of Music Coalition have written an editorial for The Hill that champions Net Neutrality from the perspective of independent music makers and producers.

“While many argue the Internet has had a negative impact on traditional record sales, it has also helped artists to tear down the walls between themselves and their fans and created the foundation for an unparalleled musician-powered renaissance, Jenny and Michael write. They add that this technology has allowed musicians to overcome a recording label system that allows only the most mainstream acts to rise to the top. According to Toomey and Bracy:

“For musicians, net neutrality means they should have the unfettered ability to make their work available to potential fans without undue interference from corporate gatekeepers. Similarly, music fans should have the ability to access this music via a range of legitimate business models. Net neutrality also ensures the continued innovation that has spurred the growth of the indie sector, the transition to a legitimate digital economy and, more widely, consumer adaptation of broadband services.

“To understand the importance of net neutrality for artists, look at the lack of a similar principle in modern commercial radio. When informally polled as to why they sign away their copyrights to major labels, most artists explain that they need to be on a major label in order to have a shot at commercial radio airplay. And, sadly, these artists have a point.”

Toomey and Bracy ask a series of poignant questions to draw a chilling parallel between the corruption of commercial radio by major broadcast companies and plans by corporations such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast to seize control of the Internet:

“What would happen if Sony paid Comcast so that sonymusic.com would run faster than iTunes or, more important, faster than cdbaby.com (where over 135,000 indie artists sell their music)? Would a new form of Internet payola emerge, with large Internet content providers striking business deals with the dominant Internet service providers? How would that affect indie artists? Would it shut down the burgeoning new economy and replace it with one that looks a lot like our closed media market?

“The large broadband providers insist these concerns are based in paranoid fantasy. What they have to realize, and what Congress has to address, is that the connection between radio consolidation, payola and these debates is real. With the passage of the Telecommunications Act in 1996, Congress essentially handed the radio industry over to huge corporations focused solely on the bottom line, with particularly devastating results for local music communities across the country. Now some of the same congressional leaders who oppose strong network-neutrality provisions are also calling on the FCC to lift local radio-ownership caps, which would allow Clear Channel and others to purchase even more stations.”

Toomey and Bracy call upon Congress to expressly state the principle of net neutrality. “[A]nything short of that will simply lead to a de facto form of Internet payola.”

“Musicians are not spoiling for a fight. But they are not afraid of one. Radio taught us what it was like to live in a world controlled by payola. We will never trade the emerging promise of the open Internet for one that is narrowed by Internet payola.”

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 13th, 2006 at 11:03 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.