"How do you think they're going to get customers? Through a broadband pipe. Cable companies have them. We have them. Now what they would like to do is use my pipes for free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment and [for] a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts!" - SBC (aka AT&T) CEO Edward Withacre Interview, BusinessWeek November 7, 2005
The Internet has become an extremely cost-effective way for independent artists to get their work out to the masses. On the Internet, independent artists can compete on a level playing field with any other artist as long as they have broadband access. Through the Internet, they can reach millions of people. That could change.
The phone and cable companies are considering charging content providers, such as artists who provide video files on their sites, an extra fee to get their video in a fast lane. That means those who pay up get to have their videos, film, or whatever content you may have to offer travel in the fast lane. If not, you end up in the low lanes with everyone else.
Phone and cable companies could also enter into exclusive deals. That means the phone and cable companies will only offer the fast lane option to certain preferred content providers. This means, if the phone and cable companies don't offer you a deal, even when you have the resources to pay up, you'll still end up in the slow lane with everyone else.
It's important to recognize this is also very different than having to pay extra to get a greater speed of bandwidth. Right now, once a user pays for his or her bandwidth, that user can do whatever he or she wants with it; and independent artists have done just that. They've used that bandwidth, either themselves or in collaboration with others, as a means to promote and deliver their work to other Internet users.
Now, phone and cable companies want to double-dip into the artists pockets. They not only want to charge artists for the bandwidth into the home, but they also want to charge artists a fee so that the artists can have their content travel over the fast lane.
What this means is that if you've paid to get your website in the fast lane, any user who tries to access your site is guaranteed to have no issues downloading your site or viewing a video file that the user may be attempting to get. By no issues, means slow or delayed connections to your site because you're trying to fight the congestion on the slow lanes. Imagine the users experience if every time he or she tried to access your website, the download time was slow and delayed. Well, if you haven't paid up and are stuck in the slow lane, the user will at least get to you, eventually, unless they can get to someone else faster or they just give up trying to reach your site.
This year, there were attempts to get Congress to pass laws that would make sure the Internet stays as it is, so the phone and cable companies cannot charge content providers, such as independent artists for travel in a fast lane. Of course, the phone and cable companies were fighting hard against such a law, and attempts towards net neutrality legislation were defeated. However, with the new Congress, there may again be attempts to get such legislation enacted, but it is too soon to tell and whether such attempts would be successful.
Why Net Neutrality is Important for Musicians
The last decade has seen an independent music revolution powered by the Internet. An obscure band rockets to national attention on the strength of a clever YouTube video. Another sells thousands of records based on blog buzz, and nearly unknown sells out concert halls solely on the basis of Internet play. Fans have never had such a dizzying array of music choices before, and artists have never had an easier time reaching receptive audiences. And that's just music - the net has opened the door for a wide range of media from political bloggers to amateur filmmakers. A big reason these changes have occurred is because the Internet treats all users the same. Whether they are major players like iTunes or an independent record label like Dischord, everyone has equal access to the Internet.
The Daily Variety reports the divide between Hollywood labor and management over the issue of Net neutrality grew wider as two voices from the talent side urged Congress to preserve the open access of the Web.
In testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on Tuesday, Writers Guild of America West topper Patric Verrone and thesp Justine Bateman described the Internet as the only remaining open market for truly independent creators. Both emphasized the need for Net neutrality -- the notion that Internet and broadband service providers should be mandated to provide consumers with equal and unfettered access to all legal Web sites and online content.
The Motion Picture Assn. of America opposes any attempt to enforce Net neutrality, claiming it would ultimately prevent broadband service providers from policing their pipes for pirated content.
Bateman acknowledged the need -- including her own interest as an actress -- in stopping online piracy of movies and TV shows. But an Internet controlled by large service providers that theoretically could slow or block certain traffic depending on their financial interests would not allow independent artists to compete, she said.
For example, Bateman co-founded a Web site for distributing content directly online. A deal between a major studio and a broadband service provider could block access to any sites the studio deemed a competitor. Net neutrality would prohibit such practices, proponents argue.
Broadband service providers argue that Net neutrality regulation of any kind isn't necessary because users would simply drop any service that discriminated.
Verrone claimed that the same media consolidation forces that have diminished opportunities for independents in Hollywood are now threatening online opportunities.
“I started working in the entertainment industry 22 years ago," Verrone said. “Almost 30 separate companies independently produced and distributed television on the 'new media' of cable TV. Today we are down to about seven vertically integrated conglomerates, controlling not only cable TV, but also broadcast, film and even news."
“The axiom in Hollywood is that content is king, but those who control access to the king, control the kingdom," Verrone continued. “Because of federal regulations -- or lack thereof -- that control is in the hands of neither the consumer nor the content creators, but the distributors."
The Internet “holds incredible potential to resurrect a vibrant industry of independent creators," but the future of that potential lies in Net neutrality, Verrone said.
Net neutrality has split Congress along party lines: With some exceptions, Democrats favor Net neutrality while Republicans oppose it. Creative talent has generally supported Net neutrality.
Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin J. Martin, who also testified at the Senate hearing, repeated his belief that no Net neutrality rules are necessary. Martin said the commission has adopted a set of “principles" that outline acceptable broadband service practices and that the FCC has authority to enforce them should consumers lodge any complaints.
Cable giant Comcast has said those principles are only a policy statement and do not carry “binding legal obligations."
The Internet has become an extremely cost-effective way for independent artists to get their work out to the masses. On the Internet, independent artists can compete on a level playing field with any other artist as long as they have broadband access. Through the Internet, they can reach millions of people. That could change.
The phone and cable companies are considering charging content providers, such as artists who provide video files on their sites, an extra fee to get their video in a fast lane. That means those who pay up get to have their videos, film, or whatever content you may have to offer travel in the fast lane. If not, you end up in the low lanes with everyone else.
Phone and cable companies could also enter into exclusive deals. That means the phone and cable companies will only offer the fast lane option to certain preferred content providers. This means, if the phone and cable companies don't offer you a deal, even when you have the resources to pay up, you'll still end up in the slow lane with everyone else.
It's important to recognize this is also very different than having to pay extra to get a greater speed of bandwidth. Right now, once a user pays for his or her bandwidth, that user can do whatever he or she wants with it; and independent artists have done just that. They've used that bandwidth, either themselves or in collaboration with others, as a means to promote and deliver their work to other Internet users.
Now, phone and cable companies want to double-dip into the artists pockets. They not only want to charge artists for the bandwidth into the home, but they also want to charge artists a fee so that the artists can have their content travel over the fast lane.
What this means is that if you've paid to get your website in the fast lane, any user who tries to access your site is guaranteed to have no issues downloading your site or viewing a video file that the user may be attempting to get. By no issues, means slow or delayed connections to your site because you're trying to fight the congestion on the slow lanes. Imagine the users experience if every time he or she tried to access your website, the download time was slow and delayed. Well, if you haven't paid up and are stuck in the slow lane, the user will at least get to you, eventually, unless they can get to someone else faster or they just give up trying to reach your site.
This year, there were attempts to get Congress to pass laws that would make sure the Internet stays as it is, so the phone and cable companies cannot charge content providers, such as independent artists for travel in a fast lane. Of course, the phone and cable companies were fighting hard against such a law, and attempts towards net neutrality legislation were defeated. However, with the new Congress, there may again be attempts to get such legislation enacted, but it is too soon to tell and whether such attempts would be successful.
Why Net Neutrality is Important for Musicians
The last decade has seen an independent music revolution powered by the Internet. An obscure band rockets to national attention on the strength of a clever YouTube video. Another sells thousands of records based on blog buzz, and nearly unknown sells out concert halls solely on the basis of Internet play. Fans have never had such a dizzying array of music choices before, and artists have never had an easier time reaching receptive audiences. And that's just music - the net has opened the door for a wide range of media from political bloggers to amateur filmmakers. A big reason these changes have occurred is because the Internet treats all users the same. Whether they are major players like iTunes or an independent record label like Dischord, everyone has equal access to the Internet.
The Daily Variety reports the divide between Hollywood labor and management over the issue of Net neutrality grew wider as two voices from the talent side urged Congress to preserve the open access of the Web.
In testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on Tuesday, Writers Guild of America West topper Patric Verrone and thesp Justine Bateman described the Internet as the only remaining open market for truly independent creators. Both emphasized the need for Net neutrality -- the notion that Internet and broadband service providers should be mandated to provide consumers with equal and unfettered access to all legal Web sites and online content.
The Motion Picture Assn. of America opposes any attempt to enforce Net neutrality, claiming it would ultimately prevent broadband service providers from policing their pipes for pirated content.
Bateman acknowledged the need -- including her own interest as an actress -- in stopping online piracy of movies and TV shows. But an Internet controlled by large service providers that theoretically could slow or block certain traffic depending on their financial interests would not allow independent artists to compete, she said.
For example, Bateman co-founded a Web site for distributing content directly online. A deal between a major studio and a broadband service provider could block access to any sites the studio deemed a competitor. Net neutrality would prohibit such practices, proponents argue.
Broadband service providers argue that Net neutrality regulation of any kind isn't necessary because users would simply drop any service that discriminated.
Verrone claimed that the same media consolidation forces that have diminished opportunities for independents in Hollywood are now threatening online opportunities.
“I started working in the entertainment industry 22 years ago," Verrone said. “Almost 30 separate companies independently produced and distributed television on the 'new media' of cable TV. Today we are down to about seven vertically integrated conglomerates, controlling not only cable TV, but also broadcast, film and even news."
“The axiom in Hollywood is that content is king, but those who control access to the king, control the kingdom," Verrone continued. “Because of federal regulations -- or lack thereof -- that control is in the hands of neither the consumer nor the content creators, but the distributors."
The Internet “holds incredible potential to resurrect a vibrant industry of independent creators," but the future of that potential lies in Net neutrality, Verrone said.
Net neutrality has split Congress along party lines: With some exceptions, Democrats favor Net neutrality while Republicans oppose it. Creative talent has generally supported Net neutrality.
Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin J. Martin, who also testified at the Senate hearing, repeated his belief that no Net neutrality rules are necessary. Martin said the commission has adopted a set of “principles" that outline acceptable broadband service practices and that the FCC has authority to enforce them should consumers lodge any complaints.
Cable giant Comcast has said those principles are only a policy statement and do not carry “binding legal obligations."
For more information contact All About Jazz.
