“your neighbor asks to for a ride each morning so that he can go to work. You oblige since he makes good company and offers to share fuel expense. This bon accord lasts for years, until one day his lawyer commences action against you in order to retrieve his contributed gas money.

If indeed radio is under an obligation to further compensate performers and labels, why not formally introduce a pay-for-play system much like major brands compete for shelf space at Kroger or Wal-Mart? If a new artist seeks incubation on a station with a weekly cume of a million listeners, their fees for exposure would be pegged to the size and conversion of that station’s listeners to quarter hours. If a smaller artist or label can’t pay the freight, they simply don’t get incubation. This would be above board of course and resemble the exchange taking place daily in retail environments. Indeed if the performance tax comes to pass, perhaps every music station in America would only mention the title and artist if compensated. If not, listeners would simply need to guess ‘who sang that song?’

Question: How would the Beatles have forged a legacy (much less billions of dollars of royalties), without radio? How would labels like RCA, Columbia, Capitol or Warner Brothers ever have amassed fortunes without KHJ, WABC, or WLS?

And what helped boutique labels survive, then thrive in the early years? Motown, Island, Asylum and countless others found their way into the light riding the early FM wave with KVIL, WRIF, or KBCO?”

You can read Tim’s full comments at http://www.AudienceDevelopmentGroup.com