Radio finally pays artists—but a loophole lets broadcasters claim airplay is promotion

What it does

This bill extends federal copyright royalty requirements to terrestrial radio broadcasts for the first time, requiring radio stations to pay sound recording copyright holders for playing music. However, it creates a tiered fee structure that shields small and public broadcasters from market-rate royalties—stations under $100K revenue pay $10/year, those under $1.5M pay $100–$500/year—while requiring the Copyright Royalty Judges to consider radio's promotional value when setting rates. The bill also ensures songwriters' existing royalties are unaffected and directs how royalties from direct licenses are distributed to artists.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is extending copyright performance rights to terrestrial radio—a substantive policy shift—but its operative effect is heavily shaped by exemptions and rate-suppression provisions favoring small and public broadcasters, making it a hybrid royalty-expansion-plus-subsidy bill.

What the text implies

• The 'promotional value' language in Section 7 may allow broadcasters to argue that radio airplay is itself compensation, potentially suppressing royalty rates below what digital services pay, creating a two-tier system where radio pays less than streaming.
• Small broadcasters pay fixed fees ($10–$500/year) regardless of how many songs they play, creating a moral-hazard incentive for them to maximize music use without proportional cost, while larger stations face market-rate royalties.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

sound recording copyright holders; major record labels; featured and nonfeatured recording artists