Broadcasting (Oct 1931-Dec 1932)

NAB Urges Curb on A.S.C.A.P. By Changing Old Copyright Act Sirovich Measure Killed for Present Session ; Society Threatens to Terminate Truce By SOL TAISHOFF IMMEDIATE enactment of legislation amending the existing copyright law to curb the demands of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers upon broadcasters, rather than an attempt to have enacted a complete copyright law supplanting the 1909 act, was urged at the joint meeting of the NAB board of directors and copyright committee in Chicago May 24. With the failure in the House May 24 of the Sirovich copyright bill (H. R. 12094), designed to replace the 1909 law, it was felt that the current crisis on music license fees can only be met through the piece-meal amendment of the 1909 law on specific points. By recommitting the Sirovich bill to the Patents Committee, and thus, in effect, killing the measure at this session, the House refused to enact a new copyright law haphazardly without full knowledge of its purpose. A dozen members assailed vigorously the "racketeering" tactics of ASCAP, but they contended the Sirovich bill did not go far enough in restraining the pool. After a recital of the legislative copyright situation by Henry A. Bellows, CBS vice-president and chairman of the NAB legislative committee, and Louis G. Caldwell, NAB copyright counsel, the board at Chicago adopted a motion favoring specific legislation to check ASCAP. Telegrams were dispatched to all stations urging opposition to the Sirovich bill unless it contained a provision limiting the activities of ASCAP, even while the House was considering the measure. The telegrams bore the signature of Oswald F. Schuette, recently engaged copyright leader of NAB. Seeks Equitable Fees THE SENSE of the NAB action was that legislation should be enacted which would compel any organization having substantial control of the performing rights in music (meaning ASCAP) to charge equitable license fees for its music to all stations. Specifically, the amendment would provide that the standard of a reasonable fee by the copyright pools be recognized, so that in suits by the pools for infringement, the courts could limit the recovery to a reasonable license fee and take into account the fees paid by other broadcasters under similar circumstances, and could, in its discretion, require the pool to license the alleged infringer for a future period on payment of a similar fee. All phases of the copyright situation were discussed by the NAB board with its copyright and plenary committees. Paul W. Morency, WTIC, Hartford, chairman of the copyright committee, detailed the negotiations which have gone forward with ASCAP on the proposed new scale of fees, and A. J. McCosker, WOR, Newark, chair man of the plenary committee, explained its activities. It is indicated that NAB will submit to E. C. Mills, general manager of ASCAP, its formal reply to the proposed new 5-per-cent-of-gross, plus sustaining license scale, the first week in June. From ASCAP headquarters comes the reported threat that unless NAB acts soon and comes to some sort of satisfactory agreement, the Society may make the new rates effective prior to Sept. 1 — the date on which the present moratorium would end. It was indicated that ASCAP feels the NAB is "stalling" and that the counter proposal was promised May 16. The ASCAP, it was said, is not obligated to wait until that date to make effective its increased schedule, which, under the proposed terms, would increase tribute paid by broadcasters from 300 to 500 per cent over the existing scale, which grosses approximately $1,000,000 annually. Directors Present BESIDES those already named, those who attended the Chicago meeting included Harry Shaw, WMT, Waterloo, la., president of NAB; A. L. Ashby, NBC; Edward Klauber and Harry C. Butcher, CBS; Walter J. Damm, WTMJ; William S. Hedges, WMAQ; Quin Ryan, WGN; Leo Fitzpatrick, WJR; H. A. Howlett, WHK; Gene O'Fallon, KFEL; Ed Craney, KGIR, and Philip G. Loucks, NAB managing director. Defeat of the Sirovich bill comes somewhat as a surprise. Misunderstanding of the terms of the measure, combined with adroit handling of the opposition by Rep. Lanham, (D.) of Texas, defender of ASCAP, and Rep. Sol Bloom, (D.) of New York, was responsible. Before the measure was recommitted to the House Patents Committee, Rep. Bloom succeeded in having the House strike out the enacting clause, which meant the death of the legislation, but that vote was rescinded on a preferential vote to have the bill re-referred to committee. With the exception of Bloom and Lanham, a dozen other members who opposed the measure attacked ASCAP. Lanham outwardly defended the group. He is the successor to the late Rep. Vestal. (R.) of Indiana, whose pre-Society copyright bill was killed by the Senate at the last session after it had passed the House. After Rep. Sirovich had described the bill, with only passing reference to radio, Rep. Lanham launched his attack on the measure. He said the bill was drafted by an attorney for the authors and did not contain adequate protection for the interests involved. Most effective, however, was his charge that so many bills had been introduced by Sirovich on copyrights that no member of the House was familiar with the proposed legislation. He repeated time and again Press Apes Radio TAKING a cue from radio, many newspapers have started carrying advertising in connection with the daily weather report. Replies to a questionnaire sent 1,939 daily papers by Critchfield & Co., Chicago advertising agency, revealed that 567 have agreed to run 14 agate lines of such advertising; 667 papers have either refused to accept the offer or have qualified their acceptance to confine the forecast to either page two or three; while 705 have not been heard from. The list of those papers accepting advertising of this sort includes every state and comprises a combined circulation of 8,953,300. that, while an "authority" on copyrights, he had not had opportunity to investigate the bills introduced by the committee and was not familiar with the legislation. Rep. Busby, (D.) of Miss., charged the Sirovich bill is similar to the Vestal bill in that it embraces the "squeeze methods" of Gene Buck and Nathan Burkan (ASCAP officials) in "working the public for all they can." He said the bill did not restrain such efforts and that ASCAP "could absolutely put all the radio stations of the country out of business in 30 days because they are the sole judge of what they can charge." He referred to the proposed 5 per cent of gross scale. Called "Hijacking" REP. McGUGIN, (R.) of Kansas, opposed any legislation extending more privilege to any copyrighted music. "As a matter of fact," he said, "I should be ready and willing today to vote that music is not subject to copyright on the theory that those who have enjoyed the blessings and privileges of copyright music have abused and sinned away their right, call it racketeering or call it what you please." He likened the ASCAP operations to a "hijacking game the way it is practiced, and nothing else." Vigorous opposition to ASCAP was voiced by Rep. Gifford, (R.) of Pennsylvania. "It would seem," he said, "that there is going to be no limit to what this central organization can demand from a proprietor of a small hotel or the owner of a small radio broadcasting company. They swoop down upon them and say, 'you are running that at a profit.' Of course, a hotel, for example, is supposed to make a profit, but in heaven's name is every little thing which is added to make it more attractive to its guest, but which may not bring any profit by, or of, itself be made to pay a duty? . . . "I fear that this organization which represents the composer may not be purely protective but a manipulating body. It may be extremely harmful, not to say offensive, and I ask the members who, like myself, may have had small broadcasting radio stations and hotels within their own localities imposed upon, if it's not a good time to inquire into this matter during the consideration of this bill." Mr. Bristol Advertisers Check Coverage Claims Cautiousness to all Mediums Seen at A. N. A. Session THAT NATIONAL advertisers are still eyeing radio with factfinding microscopes, was evident from the character of the discussions concerning broadcasting at the annual convention of the Association of National Advertisers in Cincinnati May 20. Lee Bristol, A. N. A. president and vicepresident in charge of advertising of the Bristol-Meyers Co., New York, a leading radio advertiser, reported that 145,000 calls on radio set owners will have been made by the end of this year in a cooperative analysis the association is conducting on behalf of both agencies and advertisers. The advertisers, said Mr. Bristol, are scrutinizing agencies, circulation claims and coverage claims more closely this year than ever before — "not in an unfriendly spirit but helpfully, for they are spending our money, and we have little enough of it to spend without wasting it on carelessness." Business-Like Attitude "OUR STUDIES of radio, for instance," Mr. Bristol said, "do not mean either that we are antagonistic to it or that we particularly favor that medium. What we are trying to find out are the true facts, which are worth as much to the seller as to the buyer. "I believe the day of the 'vanity radio program is gone, if indeed it ever existed. We need to know more about this medium." Addressing the radio meeting Edgar H. Felix, radio consultant of Ridgewood, N. J., stated that $100,000,000 will be spent nationally and locally during the next year for radio time and talent without any accurate criterion of the coverage offered by radio stations. He pointed out that tabulations of mail response to specia offers or unusual programs whether individual or accumulated give no direct indication of the reliable or regular coverage of a station. Survey Cost Cut MR. FELIX said that he has beer developing equipment over a perioc of years for measuring the signa strength delivered to the listenei so that the coverage of stations can be scientifically measured as proof of what is offered the advertiser. Measurements of the signa delivered at receiving points ha; been prohibitively expensive in tht past, being used only for engineering purposes and for testimony before the Radio Commision. Mr. Felix Page 8 BROADCASTING • June 1, 1932