18
Aug

Cell Phone Radios?

   Posted by: Robert   in News

In the news recently is a story, apparently breaking on the technology blog ArsTechnica, suggesting that Congress may soon consider the question of whether or not cell phone manufacturers should be required to include FM radios in all of their devices.1  Required, as in, Congress is going to pass a law making FM radio receivers mandatory.  Even for this current Congress, where payoffs, bribery, and corruption runs rampant, this entire move is somewhat incredible.

As I understand the story right now, the FM radio mandate is part of a proposed compromise between two special interest groups lobbying hard in Washington over the relatively obscure issue of broadcast radio royalties.  Under current copyright law, radio broadcasters are only required to pay performance royalties to songwriters, not to artists or recording labels, but internet radio broadcasters are required to pay all three.  Suffice it to say, internet radio broadcasters don’t like this scheme because it places them at a competitive disadvantage, and the recording labels and artists don’t like this scheme because they don’t get paid.  Both groups have been lobbying hard in Congress to change the law to force broadcast radio to pay all three royalties; broadcast radio, of course, prefers the current system.

Congress, being Congress, is apparently considering doing what it does best:  Bailing out special interests with payoffs using our money.

In this case, the scheme involves mandating FM radios in cell phones.  Under the deal, broadcast radio would need to pick up the tab for all three royalties, up to a certain monetary cap.  In exchange, Congress will mandate that FM radio receivers be placed in portable devices including cell phones, presumably along with MP3 players and their ilk as well.  In this way, the artists and labels get their money and FM radio gets receivers in more places which should increase the number of listeners.  Everybody wins.

Everybody, that is, except for people who want to buy one of these devices.

It should go without saying that FM receivers don’t come free.  There’s circuitry involved, an antenna, and given the digital nature of most portable electronics, software to be written as well.  It’s difficult to say how much money it would cost to add FM radios to cell phones, but it’s clear from the overwhelming lack of FM-enabled phones that, whatever it costs, it’s more than people would be willing to pay.  But, with a congressional mandate, the people wouldn’t be left with a choice.  Manufacturers will pass along those costs, and consumers will still need to buy cell phones.

The good news is that this so-called compromise appears to still be pretty far away from making its way into law.  For the love of free markets, I hope it stays that way.

  1. Ars, so far, appears to be the only one with this story, with other sources around the Internet simply referring back to their article.  As someone who follows their blog, I have generally found their technology-related writing to be accurate, so I’m inclined to believe that their post reflects something that is actually happening.  Even so, the lack of other sources is worth noting. []

Tags:

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 18th, 2010 at 6:12 pm and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 comments so far

 1 

I found a great article on the terrestrial radio royalties struggle on this
Music Blog at http://www.themusicvoid.com

August 20th, 2010 at 6:42 am
Patrick
 2 

While I don’t disagree with being… Uncomfortable with a trade negotiation that involves the codification into law of a restriction on third parties, I nonetheless wish to express disagreement that FM receivers are a necessarily bad thing

My own cheapass phone includes an FM receiver. While it was not a feature I was looking for when buying it, neither was the mp3 player that seems to be standard on phones these days. I don’t really understand the desire to run down a cellphone battery listening to music when it’s just as easy to have a separate device for that purpose, but I know people do, so whatever.

I am actively annoyed by how uncommon FM radio receivers are on MP3 players, that it’s a feature one needs to specifically shop for. While such a thing becoming law, particularly as part of a law basically written by businesses who have their own interests, may not fill me with warm fuzzy feelings, I -do- wish FM receivers would become a standard rather than ‘specialized’ feature. Hell, MP3 players should have HD radio receivers soon if not already. I like radio. It exposes me to new music, or reminds me of music I haven’t heard in ages and have forgotten about, without having to specifically seek it out.

August 20th, 2010 at 8:56 am
Robert
 3 

It probably could have been a bit more clear in my post, but I don’t have a problem with having FM receivers in phones or other devices if that’s what people want to buy. What I do have a problem with is Congress mandating a consumer funded payoff to a special interest group.

The fact that there are people like yourself out there with FM in your phone is proof enough that there is at least some market for the technology. As all mighty cell phones replace other portable technology, it may well happen that people start demanding FM radio, or HD, or, who knows, maybe even satellite radio in the future. If that’s what people want, and that’s where the market goes, I’m fine with that. (Honestly, while it’s not something I’d use all the time, I wouldn’t mind having a radio in my pocket on occasion, either.)

August 20th, 2010 at 6:14 pm

Leave a reply

Note: Flames of Freedom encourages free and open discussion, so comments may express views with which its authors disagree. Flames of Freedom and its authors do not implicitly endorse any comment simply by allowing it to remain visible and uncontested.

Name
Mail (will not be published)
URI
Comment

Note: By submitting a comment, you indicate your acceptance of our Comment Policy.

Switch to our mobile site