Editorial: Performing Rights Act gives musicians their fair share for radio play

A bill to compensate musicians when their songs are played on radio is picking up steam in Congress. The Performing Rights Act, championed by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Detroit, would grant performers royalties for airplay and should be passed once the impact on small radio stations is assessed.

Currently, songwriters are the only artists who receive compensation when a song plays on the radio. The Performing Rights Act would make sure that performers -- along with copyright holders and background vocalists -- receive their piece of the pie as well. Already, satellite and Internet radio pay royalties for performers for playing their songs, as do traditional radio stations across much of the developed world, excluding the United States. This country joins a dubious cast of nations -- Iran, North Korea, China and Rwanda -- in not paying artists when their songs are broadcast.

If Congress adopts the bill, U.S. artists could then receive royalties from air play abroad, royalties that our artists aren't eligible for until we set up a royalty collection system and reciprocal agreements with other countries.

Critics -- notably, Cathy Hughes, founder and owner of Radio One -- have focused on the revenues that would leave American shores but ignore the fact that plenty of revenue would come to American artists as well. Those artists would receive an estimated $450 million in royalties each year, $100 million of which would come from abroad.

Opponents also argue that small radio stations can't afford such royalties. But the proposal gives stations drawing less than $5 million annually a three-year grace period, buying them time to adjust to paying into the royalty collection system.

It's only fair that performers should be paid for the value their artistry provides in attracting listeners and advertising dollars.