SOURCE
"The resolution, which was adopted unanimously, exposes the recording industry’s intention to use the Copyright Act to have the private radio industry make up its losses due to file sharing.

The resolution states that, “the CAB will take all measures to publicly oppose this egregious and abusive demand by the record labels including taking action before Parliament, the Copyright Board and the courts.”

“The irony of the record labels’ demand is that private radio creates value for the recording industry. Private radio broadcasters are deeply concerned about the attempt by the recording industry to recoup its losses by claiming additional payments for music played on the air,” said CAB President & CEO Glenn O’Farrell. “While broadcasters recognize that artists, producers and other rights-holders should be fairly compensated for the use of their songs, our industry believes that this tariff proposal is a blatant abuse of the principles of the Copyright Act. This demand won’t help the record labels - it will only hurt one of the few areas that is still working well for them in the digital world.”

Currently, private broadcasters pay royalties under nine different tariffs to four different collectives, with radio broadcasters alone paying almost $70 million annually for the use of music they broadcast on air. This is set to increase substantially in the face of a newly proposed reproduction right tariff filed on behalf of the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) through the Audio-Video Licensing Agency (AVLA) and the Société de gestion collective des droits des producteurs de phonogrammes et de vidéogrammes du Québec (SOPROQ). The record labels are demanding an additional payment close to $50 million annually for the right to make technical reproductions that are secondary to playing the music over the air – a right for which radio broadcasters already pay.

These payments are over and above the significant contributions the Canadian radio industry makes directly to the music industry. Each year, Canadian radio broadcasters make a substantial contribution to the development of Canadian musical talent by providing extensive on-air exposure for Canadian artists, and through Canadian talent development expenditures, totaling almost $24 million in 2005/06. The Radio Starmaker Fund and Fonds RadioStar, which are music marketing and promotion funds aimed at co-operative activities by broadcasters and the music industry, and the Canadian Radio Music Awards, which honour artists in the early stages of their careers, are prime examples of radio’s ongoing and valuable support."

"The resolution, which was adopted unanimously, exposes the recording industry’s intention to use the Copyright Act to have the private radio industry make up its losses due to file sharing."
================
It should say ALLEGED LOSSES DUE TO FILE SHARING...or losses due to greed and corruption.
~Code

Next up, the extra tax on showers, to pay for the losses suffered by people singing in the shower.

Then there's the ear tax...

A tax on kids playing the scales, and the RIAA will have a new slogan
"We tote the note".

This still doesn't address the whole internet radio debacle though.

brent -- I think the internet radio debacle is an exclusively American problem.

George, it is most certainly NOT an exclusively American problem.

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2129125,00.html

^and it sucks!!!

~~~"The resolution, which was adopted unanimously, exposes the recording industry’s intention to use the Copyright Act to have the private radio industry make up its losses due to file sharing."~~~

Which takes us back to the posting a little below this one...the Canadian government (Industry Canada) itself saw NO revenue losses due to filesharing.....

The canadian government did however try nailing a bit torrent site known as demonoid.

ChillinBuzz -- I was (obviously) not aware that the weasels were doing the same thing in the UK.

This whole notion about "losses due to file sharers" is bullshit. It is a fabrication made up by them in order to make more money.

People that are going to purchase the album will. People that download it will download it. The downloaders would not ahve bought it in the first place id they could not download it, they would just go without it. Therefore, no loss in revenue.

I have thousands of CD's Movies, etc.

I download stuff all the time, but if it is good I go purchase the real thing.
There has actually been several times I did not even know something existed until I downloaded it.

Their lost revenue is people downloading it first who "might" have bought it, listen to it, it sucks, so they delete the download and don't go and buy it.

They need to get their thumb out of there ass and stop cookie cutting everything into the same old shit and their sales will go way up.

LMAO to the singing in the shower tax!

no worries, George. never underestimate these bloodsuckers... we've never been too far behind over here with the BPI & IFPI (i think that's the names).

The RIAA, BPI, IFPI all have the same 4 major labels behind them.

Its' the SAME enemy.

THE ONES WHO DOWNLOAD IT AND NEVER PAY FOR IT ARE THE SAME ONES THAT RECORD IT OFF THE RADIO, OR THE SATELLITE MUSIC CHANNELS, OR THE CABLE MUSIC CHANNELS.

LIKE, DUH!!!!!