There hasn’t been a new episode of Happy Days on ABC in decades, but that hasn’t stopped several of the shows cast members from filing a lawsuit against CBS, the TV network that now owns the rights to the show and which allegedly hasn’t paid the actors for their fair share of the shows continuing profits.

The lawsuit claims that actors from the show have not been paid for various merchandising offers from CBS including lunch boxes, DVD box sets, trading cards and t-shirts among other items.

The lawsuit was filed My Anson Williams, Don Most, Marion Ross, Erin Moran and the estate of Tom Bosley.

According to the lawsuit, CBS has failed to deliver on their contractual obligations to the cast, which called for 5% of all net proceeds from merchandising to go to actors if their image is solely used and 2 1/2% if a group shot is used on any merchandise.

While the actors were aware of their lost payments over the years, it was the creating of a Happy Days slot machine that led to the lawsuit. According to CBS each actor is owned just $8500 to $9000 for the last four years, most money which comes from the very slot machine that have led to the lawsuit.

‘Happy Days’ Cast Suing CBS Over Royalty Payments is a post from: The Inquisitr

Technology didn’t kill radio.

Satellite radio didn’t kill terrestrial radio.

But as of today radio stands a very good chance of becoming an ever increasing wasteland to the point that we will see a massive shift away from radio stations playing music. If you think that talk radio is big now you ain’t seen nothing yet.

This is going to happen all because the very basis of how music radio works has shifted. Instead of record companies using radio stations as a way to promote new artists and new releases from established musicians the passing (with a heap of lobbying entertainment backed groups like the RIAA and musicFirst Coalition) of the Performance Rights Act radio stations will now have to pay to play that same music.

The argument put forth by the lobbyists is that this is a revenue stream that the artists are not seeing and therefor not getting paid for their work. Radio has been getting a free ride forever – getting rich off of the backs of musicians by not having to pay royalties for the music they play.

It’s a nice argument and would make sense if the musicians were actually going to see any of that royalty money. As it is they already don’t see a large chunk of what is suppose to be their money that is collected supposedly on their behalf by SoundExchange. The excuse used of course by the organization is that they can’t find the artists in order to give them the money.

So what happens with all that money?

Well the SoundEchange gets to keep it which ends up making this suppose to be non-profit very wealthy - to the tune of over $100 million as of 2007.

Now this is the group that is going to be able to collect some pretty hefty royalty money from radio stations all on the basis that it is for the musicians. The problem is that by changing the economic landscape by which radio works they are removing the incentive for any stations, other than the big conglomerates, to play new music from anyone other than the really big established musicians or bands.

Radio play has always been considered to be the biggest promotional play a musician could hope for. Even though the power of the hit lists may have lessened in our Internet world they still hold considerable power. It was advertising at it best (or worst during the payola years). That power is now gone.

As Michael Masnick at Techdirt notes

Besides, all this will do is harm up-and-coming musicians. Because radio stations will now need to pay more for playing music, they’ll play less music, and if they’re playing less music, they’ll focus just on the big name acts. Smaller up-and-coming artists should be furious with the RIAA for giving radio stations less incentive to play their works. Remember, this is the opposite of payola. While payola got new records on the air, this will make sure fewer get on the air. But it will sure put a bunch more money in the pockets of the major record labels.

This new tax revenue stream for the entertainment industry through its watchdog groups might not truly kill off radio but is sure is going to lengthen its time on life-support.

The day that radio was killed is a post from: The Inquisitr

Ever wonder why people can like the musicians and their music but literally hate the music industry?

Well if what is happening in Australia is any example it’s not all that hard to understand although people might be wondering why there’s no background music in the nightclub they’re in or the gym they’re pumping weights at. It will all boil down to a push by the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia to increase their blood money royalties collected.

The PPCA, which represents 750 record companies in the country, recently won a decision from the Copyright Tribunal which will allow them to increase the cost of music played in nightclubs by 15 times. Rubbing their hands with glee over their increased fortunes the PPCA is now going after restaurants with increases that would see a 120-seat eatery license to play music go from the current $125 per year to $19,344 a year. Small cafes would be smacked with a 4729 percent yearly increase which would take them from $124 a year to $5,860.

Next up on the PPCA blackmail list is fitness centers, pubs, shops and hairdressing salons. Their reasoning for going after these businesses

PPCA chief executive Stephen Peach said recorded music attracted patrons to venues and was significantly undervalued. "The rates we have historically charged are barely nominal and we are looking to establish a fair return. The cafe owner just has to ask if the music is worth it, and if it isn’t they don’t have to play it," he said.

Source: The Age

When it comes to the health centers the PPCA is asking for a 400 times the cost for music played in gyms, from the previous 96 cents a class to $4.54 a month for every member of the club.

Aussie nightclubs and gyms get told to bend over is a post from: The Inquisitr

Back in March Duncan wrote a post about how U.K’s Performing Rights Society (PRS) decided to go ahead with their gouging of online video sites like YouTube only to have YouTube say basically – screw you. At which point YouTube started blocking most music videos on the site to United Kingdom viewers.

YouTube said in a blog post that it would block premium music videos in the UK until it can agree to a new contract with The Performing Rights Society (PRS) that is “economically sustainable.”

“But PRS is now asking us to pay many, many times more for our license than before,” YouTube’s Patrick Walker wrote. “The costs are simply prohibitive for us – under PRS’s proposed terms we would lose significant amounts of money with every playback.”

Fast forward not even a month and that groveling sound you hear is the PRS sweet talking YouTube to come back after PRS halved its royalties. Mind you it is no wonder that PRS wants the video giant back as YouTube contributed 40 percent of PRS members’ plays during one point last year.

But Shaw was clear that won’t see Google’s site treated as a special case and denied the rate slashing was specifically designed just to lure it back: “Our organisation is here to license the entire market… This consultation period started long before the YouTube dispute arose.” Shaw admitted that YouTube was significant but said PRS has lots of online payees like Spotify and Napster.

Source: paidContent:UK

Okay, sure, whatever helps you sleep at night. The fact is YouTube traffic carries some pretty heavy weight and increasingly trade groups like PRS are realizing that they need YouTube much more than the video giant needs them.

YouTube: 1 – UK’s PRS: 0 and kissing a lot of butt is a post from: The Inquisitr

Just as the newspaper industry is facing a collapse of their business model so to is the music industry. While it is the falling advertising spending on traditional print media that is severely hurting newspapers it is also the digital world that is biting into the profits of the music industry and their trade groups. As things like CDs begin to go the way of vinyl and cassette tapes the music industry is desperately struggling to find new ways to increase their profits.

Royalty payments have in the past been what the music businesses considers to be a secondary revenue stream. That is beginning to change not just in the US but right around the world as the music trade groups responsible for collecting royalties step up their blood sucking game. In the US we are seeing the introduction by Senator Conyers Jr. of a new bill in congress that would see a change in how royalties are paid in the United States.

Currently radio stations only make royalty payments to the songwriters, this law would change it so that radio stations would have to pay royalties to record companies and artists.

“The thing that draws people to radio is the music, and performers don’t get any of that” revenue, said Michael Huppe, general counsel at SoundExchange, an organization that collects royalties for record companies and artists when music is performed on U.S. Internet and satellite radio services, which are required to pay such fees.

Source: New York Times

Of course Huppe doesn’t acknowledge the incredible amount of free advertising that artists, and record companies, get because of all the free airplay they get. This move though is similar to one that is moving throughout the world as more music trade groups in different countries are pushing for more and higher royalty payments from an increasingly number of different types of businesses.

An example of this is a recent push by the Phonographic Performance Co. of Australia which has gone after nightclubs to increase their current royalty payments of 7 cents per person, per night, up to 84 cents this year and $1.05 in a few years.

“We looked at this and thought, 7 cents just doesn’t seem right, when people are paying 10 to 15 dollars to get in and at least 5 dollars for a drink,” said Stephen Peach, chief executive of Phonographic Performance Co. of Australia, which collects the fees. “Without music, there wouldn’t be a nightclub.”

As with Huppe in the US Stephan Peach seems to ignore the fact that all that music being played in nightclubs is free advertising for their represented artists and their masters record companies. In order to further increase their money collected Peach is recommending that similar organizations around the world follow their example and begin going after: fitness centers, restaurants, and television broadcasters.

I wonder if these idiots will ever figure out that all they are doing is killing the golden goose by this type of blood sucking behavior.

Music industry set to suck even more blood is a post from: The Inquisitr