Talk:Copyright Royalty Board

United States: District of Columbia Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Washington, D.C. portal This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Low-importance).

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Misnaming the judges

Somebody continually misidentifies the panel as not containing Steve Wozniak. It is strange this page is targeted for vandilism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.223.170 (talk) 22:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Im by using a little issue I cant subscribe your feed, Im using google reader fyi. My mate and that i have been just talking over this excellent topic, she happens to be continually endeavouring to prove me incorrect! I will show her this kind of post let alone rub it in the little!

Heya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I find It truly useful & it helped me out a lot. I hope to give something back and help others like you helped me.

Previous structure?

Could anybody add information about the fee structure that was in place before the March decision? The article mentions a change *to* $500/yr minimum, but not what that change replaces. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.51.111.1 (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Agreed, this article sucks nads without the original info.

--Rektide 20:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to CNET News: "Before the changes, most Internet radio companies paid about 0.076 cents per performance, according to an analysis by attorney David Oxenford at the law firm Davis Wright Tremaine, which is representing some of the smaller Webcasters that challenged the rules." ... "[Webcasters] contend that many smaller DJs simply don't take in enough revenue to come up with the new payments, which the advocacy group SaveNetRadio estimates at as much as 1,200 percent of their previous required payments (and up to 300 percent for larger operators)."

Anne Broache (2007-07-13). FAQ: Net radio's mixed signals. [1] Retrieved 2007-07-18

-- Robert (non-user) 2007-07-18 22:52 PDT

Retroactive.

Didn't I hear that it's retroactive. Meaning the stations will have to go back and pay more for what they already thought they had purchased at a lower price. --Gbleem 09:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rate term needs defining

Unstated: per song per use, or some other measurement? -- Yellowdesk 14:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meaningless statement

In the section labeled "Reaction from Internet Radio," there's a statement that reads: "Indeed, some broadcasters (e.g., Etherbeat[7]) have already started shutting down in anticipation of the royalty rate increase." What exactly does "started shutting down" mean? A station has shut down, or it hasn't, I think -- but I also don't want to jump to conclusions and say there isn't an in between. My interpretation of the statement as it is, however, is "Some broadcasters (e.g., Etherbeat) are threatening to shut down if the royalty rate increases." I also that how it is sounds like propoganda. -- Robert (non-user) 2007-07-18 22:45 PDT