Wondering what the hullabaloo is about in the Senate hearings on "Parity, Platforms and Protection: The Future of the Music Industry in the Digital Radio Revolution"? The music industry seems worried that it isn't being properly compensated -- so what's new? -- and wants to settle the tab. Red Herring summed it up well:

"The hearings struggled to define what constitutes music performance versus music distribution in a rapidly changing market."

What's at stake here is additional revenue that would be paid to labels for the digital copies of songs broadcast on satellite radio (stations already pay for performance rights, which covers only the broadcast). Warner Music Group's digital guru, Edgar Bronfman, Jr., thinks it's not fair to allow satellite radio "to turn performances into distributions without paying distribution licenses."

And then there's the PERFORM Act, which stands for Platform Equality and Remedies for Rights Holders in Music Act of 2006. At a post at the Public Knowledge blog, Gigi Sohn quotes copyright lawyer Bob Schwartz's take on the the PERFORM Act:

"The PERFORM Act is the latest 'sky is falling' bill pushed by the recording industry. This bill would prevent satellite radio subscribers from recording and listening to programming that they have paid for, unless they pay an additional license 'tax' to the record labels on a song-by-song basis (which, in addition to cost, would severely limit the repertory that could be offered to the public)."

Public Knowledge's page on the hearings is a great resource for information relating to the PPP bill.

View of PDF of the PERFORM Act here.