[Peace-discuss] USG plans for Iraq and Iran -- and protesters?

[Chas. 'Mark' Bee]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
To: "Chas. 'Mark' Bee" <c-bee1 at itg.uiuc.edu>
Cc: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] USG plans for Iraq and Iran -- and protesters?


> Mark's last post almost seemed coherent, but the moment's passed.

   Hmm.  You mean like continually telling a radio station to ditch 95% of 
its music for your own selfish motives, despite a complete absence of real 
reasons to do so, months after all your hoax points were answered elsewhere, 
and when no brick and mortar radio station has ever done so and survived? 
lol

  Just another example of your urging a different local organization down 
the primrose path for your own aggrandizement.  I guess coherence is as 
coherence does.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
Cc: "WEFT Associates mailing list" <wefta at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Wefta] WORT streams some of their on-air broadcast online.


>
>
> J.B. Nicholson-Owens wrote:
>
>> some other online stations I've listened to have made the choice to not 
>> play
>> RIAA-licensed works.  This means that they don't have to deal with the 
>> RIAA
>> license restrictions at all...
>
> Why isn't this the appropriate solution?  Then webcasting could proceed 
> unhindered.  WEFT shouldn't be broadcasting commercial music that's easily 
> downloaded to iPods anyway.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
To: <CROW at reformweft.org>
Cc: <wefta at weft.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: [WEFTa] The choice between webcasting and big business


>A friend of mine (techie, early 40s, works at Beckman) was telling me that 
>he listened to WILL, not WEFT, at home and work.  Why?  "Well, I don't own 
>a *radio*," he said in the tone he'd use if I suggested he had a 
>butter-churn or a washboard. Of course not: he listens continuously via his 
>computer.
>
> WEFT of course should be webcasting as WILL does, but it is now even less 
> possible for us to do so, owing to a "new fee schedule for webstreaming 
> RIAA tracks ... effective retroactively to the start of 2006 ... Next year 
> and every year through 2010 this fee will go up..."(See 
> <http://digitalcitizen.info/>.)
>
> "I'm not sure if this is in addition to or a replacement for the content 
> restrictions which prevent playing songs from the same artist more than a 
> certain number of times in a row, or in a 3-hour period, and so on. But 
> perhaps that doesn't matter -- it's not hard to see how the new fee 
> schedule makes webcasting RIAA tracks completely unaffordable. Just run 
> some sample calculations out to 1 year and watch the fees add up beyond 
> what small stations (individuals and small volunteer outfits) can afford 
> to pay."
>
> The BBC reports, "Royalties threaten internet radio. Internet radio 
> stations are warning they could be forced off the air by a big increase in 
> the royalties they pay to play music."
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/technology/6430489.stm>
>
> The solution for WEFT is obvious.  Don't do business with the RIAA. Their 
> material is available (for the fee) to every ipod.  Let WEFT become what 
> it says it is, alternative radio.  Webcast independent cultural 
> terial.   --CGE



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
To: "CROW is a list for people interested in the radio station WEFT." 
<crow at reformweft.org>; <wefta at weft.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 4:14 PM
Subject: [WEFTa] [Fwd: The choice between webcasting and big business]


> [The choice is becoming clearer, between WEFT's being an outlet for 
> (essentially an unpaid advertisement for) commercial recorded music, or 
> webcasting.  --CGE]
>
> From Democracy Now, 18 April 2007:
>
> Most Online Radio Stations Face Bankruptcy Under New Rules
>
> Meanwhile online radio stations have been dealt a major setback. Last 
> month the Copyright Royalty Board decided to implement a new system to 
> determine how royalties are paid for music played online. Analysts predict 
> the royalty increase will bankrupt 85 percent of online broadcasters. The 
> board's decision was opposed by many small internet broadcasters as well 
> as National Public Radio and Yahoo. On Monday the Copyright Royalty Board 
> denied a request to reconsider the royalty hike. The board also declined 
> to postpone the May 15 deadline to collect monthly payments under the new 
> rules. Up until now small broadcasters have been allowed to pay about 12 
> percent of their revenues but now the royalties will be calculated on a 
> per-song, per-hour rate. To fight the rate increase, a group of 
> webcasters, musicians and independent record labels have formed the 
> SaveNetRadio Coalition.
>