Re:No kidding? (Score 1)

the SDARS providers did in fact negotiate a deal with RIAA (through Soundexchange) for royalties. They pay a flat 10% of gross proceeds.

Observe: http://www.soundexchange.com/rates.html (down at the bottom of the page, the last entry)

As far as on the front end - SDARS providers (XM in particular) have not exactly been acting in good faith. For example: XM has deployed a network of terrestrial repeaters that theoretically could be used to deliver local content - the NAB agreed to allow this provided XM committed not to deliver local programming... then turned around and set up local traffic service for dozens of markets.

More info: http://www.techcentralstation.com/011404E.html

I suspect the RIAA feels the same was as the NAB did about local programming - it was far outside the scope and spirit of their existing agreements, hence their panties being in a wad.

When I first saw this headline - I assumed it was because the RIAA was going after XM and Sirius for their flagrant DMCA violations. The DMCA is utterly ludicrous in terms of what it requires (particularly in regards to the "performance complement" restricting the number of songs by the same artist or on the same album in a given time period - but it is in fact the law and the SDARS don't appear to even be trying to conform to it. I wonder how long until the RIAA goes after them for that.