[RFU] Re: [Rfu-barnraising] Re: {leti} Re: the automation question
petetridish
petri at prometheusradio.org
Fri Oct 28 10:56:09 CDT 2005
ok- sorry not to have weighed in before. it sort of demands a full
answer, and i have done a little bit of that below.
when groups ask us about this, we generally encourage them to stream.
it is not very expensive, not too difficult and most importantly, it
helps to stake a claim of community media in the media of the future.
FM is very important, and will remain important for at least the next
ten years. but ultimately, a lot of media is going to migrate to some
form of the internet. we encourage people to think of their fm station
as a beachhead into the battle for the future of media. clear channel
keeps all of its fm stations, and uses their stations to shape policy
and establish brands that they will be using on the internet or
satellite or where ever ten years from now. completely ignoring the web
is at the peril of your mission of serving your community.
an important thing to realize is that the web is totally separate from
your lpfm. the fcc does not regulate web streaming. so nothing can
happen to your lpfm permit, no matter what you do or don't do on the
web.
it is also important to realize that the issues with the DCMCA are
still to some extent in play. the RIAA made an outrageous and
preposterous offer to the radio industry, it was mostly rejected, and
they have since bargained considerably down. they could still bargain
further down. in the current state of the law, they have the legal
right to charge for use of their copyrights for webstreaming. but the
rate and the conditions are still somewhat flexible. the government
does not decide the rate, though they may help to arbitrate it in the
case of a dispute.
think of yourself in a used car lot. you want a car. dude (let's
call him Rocky) wants to sell you a car. both of you are sizing each
other up--Rocky thinks "how much will you pay cause you want the car."
you are thinking "Rocky's got fifty cars here, he hasn't made a sale
all day, he looks like he needs some money in his pocket for a round of
drinks at the bar tonight." etcetera. it is exactly this sleazy- just
on a bigger scale. they have a standard rate they are offering, but
they cut different deals depending how big you are and what the
situation is and what their financials are looking like this quarter.
of course, if you are already driving Rocky's car, he's got a little
bit of an advantage...but ultimately the easiest thing for him to do is
to say-- just give me the $500 and we'll call it even. Approached
individually, it looks like Rocky's got a little bit of an edge.
imagine though, you and twenty friends go down and just start driving
Rocky's cars around. he's just one guy, he can't keep track of all of
you. and some of you look inside the registrations, and you are like "
well it is not even clear if this car is really Rocky's. looks like he
got given this by a corrupt city councilor that took these cars off the
street illegally. actually, i think this was my car that got stolen
last month and is now merely repainted. i'm going to drive over to my
lawyer and ask him about this. " there are a lot of people that are
driving this guys cars now. Rocky can't keep track of them all. he is
inclined to throw up his hands, and be like-- "Friends, let's make this
easy. if y'all just give me $250 each, we can forget this ever
happened, and all go home happy. no big deal for you, no big deal for
me...." Is Rocky offering you a good deal, do you all take it? or do
you go get twenty more friends, or maybe your lawyer, on the chance
that you might be able to all drive off for free in the cars that he
legally may have stolen in the first place?
i don't know if the deal offered by the riaa is really fair at this
point. it is a lot better than where they started, and a lot of people
are taking it. but they have not started attempting to sue people into
accepting it yet-- they want to get more people to accept it at this
point, so they can show a judge that most people in that situation
think it is fair enough before they go out on a limb. in the first
case they bring, if the judge sees that a lot of people don't accept
the deal, he might not think it is fair and might throw out their
lawsuits. that would not be a pretty picture for the riaa.
i'd say that your chances of being sued by the riaa for doing a single
webcast without having made a deal with them are nil. many people have
been doing it for years and they have not been touched yet, they have
not settled for the deal. at some point, you may want to decide whether
this is your fight or not. i have also heard of zero attempt at
enforcement or even monitoring about the provisions about the number of
songs per album, or forward announcing, or any of that. A lot of people
jay walk, and mostly they get away with it. I personally often ride my
bike through a red light if no one else is at the intersection, even
though i am supposed to follow the same traffic laws as cars do and
wait for green. to my mind, those laws were designed for cars, not
bicycles, and they deserve my contempt. sometimes it is tough for
groups to collectively take the level of risk that all of us casually
take individually. I think risk taking is important, and breaking dumb
laws is an important duty as citizens in a pretty wacked out society.
And i think that groups should do it, not just individuals. But that is
just my way of thinking about such things.
I think it would be safer, and actually maybe more effective, to stream
a tape loop during " forbidden" content, saying " This show prevented
from being brought to you by the fucking stupid ass RIAA" ( this is
legal because you are just streaming it on the web instead of the radio
show that would have been on). that would let your web listeners know
about the issues that still remain in web streaming.
Anyhow, all that said, what is much more important than any of this
about any particular technology is your decision making process. what i
try to encourage people to think is that you are not building a radio
station. you are building an institution of media democracy, that will
ride the waves of all parts of the spectrum and every worthwhile new
technology. and the most important thing in that is not which wave or
which technology-- but how you work together. Prometheus in no way
wants to push your group towards one decision or another, or undermine
your groups decision making process, because that is the most important
thing you have. you should make this decision in a considered manner,
which means it should probably wait till after the barnraising. We can
tell you that most stations we have worked with have chosen to stream,
and some of them have chosen to pay. Many of them have not taken the
content restrictions very seriously- like me on the bike at the
intersection. I doubt that those will ultimately stand up anyway when
they are at some point challenged in the courts.
It would be cool to be able to teach webstreaming at this event, and
show the potential linkages between wifi and lpfm. so i hope we can
think of some way that everyone feels comfortable with some sort of
webcast of the first broadcast. but if we can't find that way, that is
fine, so be it. Something cool will happen.
thanks,
pete tridish
On Oct 28, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Lynsee Melchi wrote:
> Prometheus
>
> do you guys have any info on how strict and tightly monitored lpfm
> stations are as far as this issue goes??
>
> Lynsee
> <-----Original Message----->
> >From: Phil Stinard
> >Sent: 10/27/2005 6:09:04 PM
> >To: sascha at ucimc.org;andrew at funferal.org
> >Cc: leti at lists.prometheusradio.org;rfu-
> >barnraising at lists.chambana.net;rfu at lists.groogroo.com
> >Subject: RE: [RFU] Re: [Rfu-barnraising] Re: {leti} Re: the
> automation question
> >
> >I expressed concerns about streaming at last night's barnraising
> meeting,
> >but apparently to no avail, since no one is addressing the concerns I
> >expressed. My concerns are: (1) cost of recurring licensing fees,
> and (2)
> >restrictions on content (number of songs by a particular artist or
> from a
> >particular album). I hear people saying that the FCC rules and
> licensing
> >rules don't matter, but I'm not willing to take that chance. Do you
> want
> >WRFU to lose its license to broadcast if someone decides to get
> legalistic
> >on us? If someone gives us the money and we can stream, fine, but if
> I have
> >content that is not allowed, as I certainly will, I'll just turn the
> stream
> >off during my program. I trust we will at least have that option.
> >
> >--Phil
> >
> >
> >>From: Sascha Meinrath
> >>To: Andrew Ó Baoill
> >>CC: leti ,WRFU Mailing list
> >>,rfu barnraising
> >>
> >>Subject: [RFU] Re: [Rfu-barnraising] Re: {leti} Re: the automation
> question
> >>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:44:25 -0500
> >>
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>Andrew and I should go grab a beer so I can get a better feel for
> his
> >>concerns; but I and other folks are definitely interested in
> setting up
> >>streaming. I'm not sure I buy that streaming would necessarily
> negatively
> >>impact the quality and/or community grounding of the station -- at
> WEFT, we
> >>streamed for quite some time and only stopped because the price
> increased.
> >>I haven't heard of any negative repercussions from streaming, and
> unless
> >>someone can make the case the WRFU would be differentially
> impacted, I
> >>think WEFT provides us with a fairly good (local) precedent. Also,
> just so
> >>it's noted somewhere, we decided at last night's Barnraising
> meeting to do
> >>streaming during the Barnraising, that part of things is a go.
> >>
> >>Either way, I think there's a core group of folks who would be very
> >>interested in learning about streaming and how to set this sort of
> system
> >>up -- so we should definitely do that. Long-term, it could be that
> WRFU
> >>decides not to stream their signal; however, other stations (such
> as WEFT)
> >>may be interested and this is an opportunity to demonstrate how
> this works.
> >> Since we already have a server infrastructure available through
> the IMC,
> >>I think it makes all the sense in the world for us to set this up
> for the
> >>Barnraising and see what happens down the road.
> >>
> >>--Sascha
> >>
> >>Andrew Ó Baoill wrote:
> >>>I appreciate your suggestion. However, there are numerous reasons
> that
> >>>WRFU has not yet decided to do this.
> >>>
> >>>First, WRFU will truly be a bare-bones station. We actually don't
> have
> >>>the cash to run our basic service, let alone to commit ourselves
> to the
> >>>additional copyright fees associated with streaming. WRFU and the
> IMC
> >>>only have limited bandwidth available, so streaming would be a
> heavy
> >>>load, or require rental of additional bandwidth.
> >>>
> >>>Second, some of us have concerns about the impact that streaming
> has on
> >>>the nature of a community radio station. Since WRFU is an
> autonomous
> >>>consensus-based operation, it is important that we examine this
> issue and
> >>>come to agreement among ourselves before moves are made on this
> issue.
> >>>
> >>>Third, about those concerns. Jon Bekken, in an essay in Seizing the
> >>>Airwaves, mentions in passing the impact that increased power (and
> >>>therefore range) has on the role that a community station plays,
> using
> >>>our local WEFT as an example. Not all the concerns raised there
> follow
> >>>through to internet streams, but many do. With all due respect,
> WRFU is a
> >>>station for Urbana, not for the next town over. As far as I am
> concerned,
> >>>we are concerned, primarily, with providing space for
> self-expression by
> >>>members of our community. Some see community radio as more
> concerned with
> >>>providing content to listeners, and in this case streaming to the
> world
> >>>can be seen as a benefit. For those who want a station to be firmly
> >>>anchored in its community - either in terms of content produced,
> or in
> >>>being a space in which all listeners can aspire to becoming an
> active
> >>>participant, streaming becomes more problematic. For some more
> detailed,
> >>>if still preliminary, thoughts on issues raised by these
> technologies you
> >>>can see my recent post:
> >>>http://funferal.org/mt-archive/001098.html
> >>>or an earlier article, concerned more particularly with digital
> radio in
> >>>Europe:
> >>>http://www.tuppenceworth.ie/ArtsEnt/radiodab.html
> >>>
> >>>Fourth, running a webstream for the special event that is the
> >>>barnraising, may differ, and is something we can examine at WRFU's
> >>>meeting this Tuesday. Of course, while it could be a useful
> publicity
> >>>element of the barnraising, it could also undermine the station's
> ongoing
> >>>policy, should it adopt one.
> >>>
> >>>Andrew
> >>>
> >>>On 27 DFómh 2005, at 15:49, Andy Gunn wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>i _highly_ recommend that you stream your signal over the
> internet. if
> >>>>you don't, you are cutting out a potentially huge audience. your
> signal
> >>>>is only 100 watts, so people in even the next town over may not
> be able
> >>>>to hear you. with a stream - they will have the option of tuning
> in at
> >>>>least when they are by a computer with an ethernet connection.
> >>>>
> >>>>i really think the fees are minimal - a few hundred dollars a
> year. i
> >>>>know many stations that stream without any legal troubles
> whatsoever,
> >>>>and some of them don't pay the fees at all.
> >>>>
> >>>>it will be a relatively simple task to set up a streaming encoder
> during
> >>>>the barnraising - we will have techs running all over the place
> who will
> >>>>want things to do. i would ask that at bare minimum, we set up a
> >>>>computer to stream the launch of the station - we can publicize
> it on
> >>>>our sites and tell people to tune in via email. if you want to
> turn it
> >>>>off after the barnraising, that is up to you.
> >>>>
> >>>>-a
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, andrew baoill wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>We've left streaming to one side for the moment, for both
> practical
> >>>>>reasons, and because some of us have broader philosophical
> concerns
> >>>>>about the issue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>While the donation is welcome, can we wait until after the
> >>>>>barnraising to engage with this issue? I would like to give the
> topic
> >>>>>the attention it deserves, but there are so many other things at
> the
> >>>>>moment I don't think we have time to take on additional issues.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Andrew
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On 26 DFómh 2005, at 14:32, Sascha Meinrath wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The Acorn Active Media Foundation is planning to donate use of
> one
> >>>>>>of our servers for streaming (and integrating this into the
> CUWiN
> >>>>>>wireless network). We have some parameters we're operating under
> >>>>>>but would also love help setting this up to your specs. We've
> just
> >>>>>>finished building the system and making sure it takes the server
> >>>>>>software we're loading onto it. We'll probably follow something
> >>>>>>along the lines of:
> >>>>>>
>
> >>>>>>http://www.yolinux.com/TUTORIALS/
> LinuxTutorialAudioStreaming.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>But if there are techies on the list who would like to be
> involved
> >>>>>>with this effort (especially during the craziness of the
> >>>>>>barnraising), drop me a line.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>In solidarity,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--Sascha
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Andrew Ó Baoill wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>You would take an output from the console and feed it to an
> input
> >>>>>>>on the soundcard if you wanted to record the station (or other
> >>>>>>>console output) onto the computer, or to create a webstream,
> etc.
> >>>>>>>Andrew
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>
> >>>>--------------------------------------------------
> >>>>| Andy Gunn - Technical and Training Organizer |
> >>>>| Prometheus Radio Project - prometheusradio.org |
> >>>>| andy at prometheusradio.org 215-727-9620 |
> >>>>----------------------------------
> >
> >=== message truncated ===
_ _
pe'tre dish (n): a squat, cylindrical, transparent article of
laboratory glassware, useful in observing resistant strains of culture
in aetherial media.
petri at prometheusradio.org
www.prometheusradio.org
Prometheus Radio Project
215-727-9620
see more about the stations we just built in Tanzania!!!
http://www.uaacc.habari.co.tz/radio%20barn%20raising%20at%20UAACC.htm
More information about the Rfu-barnraising
mailing list