The IRFA was a proposed royalty rate reduction across the board of 85% on an already discounted rate. So yeah, not only did it affect Performers, it also affected Songwriters and Publishers. Is it any wonder why so many Songwriters and Publishers also came out against the bill and went to lobby Congress?

The part about the Performers royalty was actually defended in Congress with lawmakers suggesting that terrestrial radio and broadcast outlets need to step up by adding the Performers Royalty to their bottom line. Because they've had it too good for too long.

I'm looking out at the fact that I'm happy to be making a living creating music. When some misguided lawmaker wants to take 85% of a good portion of my income away from me - yeah, I have an f'n problem with it.

"the proposed Act would have no effect whatsoever on songwriter royalties." Wrong. Go read both the HoR and the Senate and how they wanted to gut the Copyright board: http://beta.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/6480/text
http://www.wyden.senate.gov/downloa...of-2012-text-as-introduced?inline=scribd

Yes Dan, we disagree. However, I make my disagreement based on the fact that I know what the bill is about and why it sucked for people like myself, Greg Watton and others who are making a living via royalties. Not because of some personal B.S. meter based on rumor and hype.

Jody Whitesides
A Funky Audio Lap Dance For Your Ears!
www.jodywhitesides.com