KryKey WebRadio http://bit.ly/gfHDKx 320K Streaming unlimited listeners & storage live talk free InternetRadio KryKey Music Podcast

Using Twitter For Your KryKey Web Radio Station

Using Twitter For Your KryKey Web Radio Station

The power of Twitter for your KryKey Web Radio Station is today's subject. Does it work? How do I use it? are the two most common questions we get at KryKey Web Radio from our radio station owners.

First of all it does work if used correctly, and by correctly we mean adding the correct 'search terms' to each Tweet and of course not using it so much as to spam people. So here are some of our helpful suggestions to help you use Twitter and get more people to listen to your radio station.

• when you add your 'Tweet' you should also add 'search terms' that will make it easier for people to read you Tweet. For example if you go to Twitter and in the search box put in #webradio what will be displayed is all the Tweets from everyone that has added that 'search term'. So if you have a Hip-Hop radio station you should always add #hiphop to your Tweet. If you are in New York how about adding #NewYork. Here are some of the 'search terms' we suggest you should add - #webradio #internetradio #music #nowplaying - optional 'search terms' are your location (i.e. #newyork for example), genre (i.e #hiphop #r&b #top40)

Of course you only have 140 characters to add all this, your radio station name, your radio station link and your message. 

 

When you add your radio station link remove the http:// and that will save you 7 characters - you can also use the service from Tiny URL which helps you shorten the address to a smaller number of characters (example this address http://www.krykey.com/Radio/PRSPage.aspx?id=126 which is 45 characters can be shortened to http://tinyurl.com/nf6n5t which is only 25 characters, a saving of 20!).

 

You will soon see people starting to 'follow' you, and dont forget if it is relevent you should 'follow' them back.

 

To 'follow' KryKey Web Radio you can find us at http://Twitter.com/krykey

 

We hope this has helped you. If you find Twitter has helped you, then leave a comment here to tell others reading this how it has.

 

Will piracy crackdown bring iPod border checks?

by Bob Sullivan

Laptop computers examined by border guards looking for pirated software. IPods seized at airport security lines on mere suspicion of containing illegally downloaded music. Home Web users hit with the Internet death penalty -- cut off from access -- by Internet providers acting at the direction of other U.S. corporations. All because of secret trade negotiations being conducted now by dozens of nations, led by U.S. officials.

That's the doomsday scenario being painted by online civil liberties advocates who say they've been shut out of discussions that could radically alter the way consumers use technology. Supported by firms that want to protect their intellectual property rights to movies, music, books and software, the talks are designed to create an international agreement that would make stopping and prosecuting offenders much easier.

But among the most likely outcomes, warns Rashmi Rangnath of advocacy group "Public Knowledge," is a new legal regime that requires Internet service providers to become an extension of law enforcement, acting as judge and jury while punishing alleged digital pirates.

"You would have Internet providers substituting their own decisions for law enforcement decisions," she said. "The result will be an agreement ... that pushes the boundaries of what (Internet users) can't do."

Secret negotiations on what's known as the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA, began during the Bush administration but continue under President Obama, with the most recent meeting taking place Nov. 4-6 in Seoul, South Korea. The European Union and Canada, Japan and many other nations are participating in the talks. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office, which is leading the talks for the U.S., has argued that secrecy is standard in any international negotiation.

Legally, the Obama administration can conduct the talks without consulting Congress. While international treaties require congressional approval, trade agreements can be approved directly by the White House.

Advocacy groups are hardly alone in their concerns with the talks. Controversy around ACTA began to swell last year, when a draft proposal was leaked on the Internet. It included several controversial provisions, including the possibility of a "three strikes" rule modeled after French law, which requires ISPs to cut off Net users found to be engaging in copyright-infringing activities three times.

Clear
The steady drumbeat of opposition to the process reached the U.S. Senate last week, when Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., issued a statement urging Obama to open up the process.

"The public has a right to monitor and express informed views on proposals of such magnitude," the two senators wrote in a letter to the president. "We firmly believe that the public has a right to know the contents of the proposals being considered under ACTA, just as they have the right to read the text of bills pending before Congress."

While efforts to enhance intellectual property law enforcement are supported by many large firms in the music, software and video industries, corporations are not unanimous in their support. On Monday, a trade group for European Internet Service Providers issued perhaps the most vocal repudiation yet of the negotiations. EuroISPA issued a statement (PDF) indicating its concern that the dramatic enforcement measures being considered would attack civil liberties without denting piracy much.

Herbbox"Such heavy-handed measures would create a serious danger of undermining and restricting the open innovative space that lies at the very heart of the Internet's success," said the statement, signed by EuroISPA's president, Malcolm Hutty. "This agreement would have a negative impact on Internet users without having an appreciable impact on fighting illicit use of copyrighted material."

Experts consulted, sworn to secrecy
Earlier this year, the U.S. Trade Representative made efforts to open up the process, releasing some meeting notes and inviting a small group of U.S. experts to see the proposed new rules and offer commentary.

But underscoring the secrecy of the discussion, the experts were forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Then, the U.S.T.R. refused requests to reveal the identities of the participants, saying that releasing the names would compromise national security. The list was released only after a Freedom of Information Request filed by advocacy group Knowledge Ecology International.

The vast majority of participants in the review represented large corporations such as Google and News Corp., or corporate interest groups like the International Intellectual Property Alliance. Six participants represented civil liberties interests were also invited.

Rangnath and her Public Knowledge colleague Sherwin Siy were two of the six. In an interview with msnbc.com, they were severely limited in their ability to answer questions. Rangnath said she was shown a portion of the draft agreement during a one-hour meeting with U.S. officials, but wasn't allowed to copy any of the documents and was told a subsequent version would likely differ from what she was shown.

Asked if the experience made her more or less concerned about the implications of the agreement, she said only, "I don't think I can answer that."

Web users could be cut off
While Siy said some doomsday concerns, such as manual border searches of laptop computers and MP3 players, were likely impractical, Internet death penalties were a real possibility. U.S. law currently offers broad protection for Internet providers when illegal activity occurs on their networks outside their knowledge. But an international agreement could lead to additional "third-party" liability for companies that handle Web traffic. The mere threat of increased liability from such a trade agreement could be enough to have a severe chilling effect on Internet users, he said.

"An ISP coming under real legal pressure, a change that makes it easier for someone to plausibly sue (an ISP) for billions of dollars ... what risk-averse company is going to risk a 2 percent chance of a $100 billion suit?" he said. Instead, ISPs would readily side with rights holders over users, he said.

There is already disturbing precedent for blunt use of copyright enforcement tools, he said, with outcomes that should give negotiators pause. Just last month, an entire Ohio city's free municipal WiFi was shut down after Sony Pictures complained that the network was used by someone to download a pirated movie.

It's unclear if such enforcement would be continued, or enhanced, by ACTA, because so little is known about the content of the draft agreement. But based on the leaked document, Kimberlee G. Weatherall, a professor at the University of Queensland in Australia, issued a paper last year summing up the provisions (PDF).

Among the possibilities she inferred from the leaked document:

1. An extension of criminal liability by redefining what counts as copyright infringement on a "commercial scale." Most nations’ laws treat possessors of pirated goods differently than those who pirate for profit. A broader definition could land more consumers in criminal, rather than civil, courts.

2. The imposition of "deterrent-level" penalties, which could ratchet-up punishments.

3. Provisions in the agreement that would require ISPs in to actively police copyright infringement on their services

4. Additional burdens on ISPs, such as use of filters that would prevent sharing of copyright-protected materials.

5. Possible seizure and destruction of intellectual property rights “infringing goods" such as tools to mass-produce movie DVDs. This section, she writes, has given rise to fear that border guards will have the authority to seize and destroy laptops and iPods.

Weatherall writes that inclusion of such measures in the agreement could effectively create new laws outside of member nations’ legislative processes, she said.

"Such provisions have not been enacted internationally, they do not represent a consensus approach; they have been actively opposed in many countries," she wrote. "This would, in fact, be lawmaking by treaty-making."

Siy and Rangnath said the U.S.T.R.'s office assured them that nothing in the agreement will go beyond powers already afforded to authorities and it won't "change U.S. law." But the vagaries that already exist in provisions like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act -- thorny issues involving emerging new technologies that are constantly being decided by U.S. courts -- could mean ACTA would end up extending U.S. law anyway. Worse, future changes to digital U.S. law might not be possible without consulting nations that sign the ACTA.

International agreements are also poor tools for enforcing copyright law, which requires a great deal of “finesse,” Siy argued. For example, possessing child pornography is illegal. But possessing an electronic copy of a movie, song or book is often legal – its use determines its legal status. While a second copy of a book for personal use might be allowed, for instance, a second copy e-mailed to a friend might not.

So far, intellectual property rights holders and U.S. courts have yet to demonstrate the ability to consistently employ such finesse, he said. International agreements governing such situations would likely exacerbate the problem. That's why all interested parties should be able to debate potential impact of ACTA in the open, Siy said.

"Nuances with internet infringement should be taken into account as we try apply copyright laws," he said. "That's why transparency is goal number one here, but it's not the final goal. We want to roll up our sleeves and get into the muck of dealing with this. That's the important work."

The Music Business Today

The Music Business Today

Over the last few years, everyone has witnessed the decline of the music business, highlighted by who did what and why and the blame directed against record companies, artists, internet file sharing and any other theories for which a case could be made. Everyone has read and heard about the "good old days" and how things used to be. People remember when music existed as an art that motivated social movements. Artists and their music flourished in back alleys, the streets, pubs and barns until, in some cases, a popular groundswell propelled it far and wide. These days, that possibility no longer seems to exist. Had the music industry not been decimated by a lack of vision caused by corporate accountants obsessed with the bottom line, musicians would have been able to stick with creating music rather than trying to market it as well. During the late 80s and early 90s the music industry underwent a transformation and restructured, catalyzed by three distinct factors. Record companies no longer viewed themselves as conduits for music, but as a function of Wall Street. Companies were acquired, conglomerated, bought and sold; public stock offerings ensued, shareholders met. At this very same time in the USA, new Nielsen monitoring systems -- BDS (Broadcast Data Systems) and SoundScan were employed to document record sales and radio airplay. Prior to 1991, the Billboard charts were done by manual research; radio stations and record stores across the country were polled to determine what was on their playlists and what the big sellers were. Thus, giving Oklahoma City, for example, an equivalent voice to Chicago's in terms of potential impact on the music scene. BDS keeps track of gross impressions through an encoded system that counts the number of plays or "spins" that a song receives. That number is, thereafter, multiplied by the number of potential listeners. SoundScan was put in place at retail centers to track sales by monitoring scanned barcodes of units crossing the counter. A formula was devised whereby the charts were based 20% on the SoundScan number and 80% on BDS results. The system had changed from one that measured popularity to one that was driven by population. The Record companies soon discovered that because of BDS, they only needed to concentrate on about 12 radio stations in the US; there was no longer a business rationale for working secondary markets that were soon forgotten -- despite the fact that these were the very places where rock and roll was born and thrived. Why pay attention to Louisville -- worth a comparatively few potential listeners -- when the same one spin in New York, Los Angeles or Atlanta, etc., was worth so many more potential listeners? All of a sudden there were #1 records that few of us had ever heard of. At the time we asked ourselves, "Am I out of touch?" We didn't realize that this was the start of change that would grow to kill, if not the whole of the music business, then most certainly, the record companies.

Ronald Reagan's much-vaunted trickle-down theory said that wealth tricked down to the masses from the elite at the top, and we have now we've found out that this is patently untrue -- the current economic collapse reflects this self-serving folly. The same holds for music. It doesn't trickle down; it percolates up from the artists, from word of mouth, from the streets and rises up to the general populace. Constrained by the workings of SoundScan/BDS, music now came from the top and was rammed down people's throats. By 1997, the consumers who had been a long time uninvolved grew passive, and radio stations had to change formats. Creative artistry and the artists, themselves, were now of a secondary importance, taking the back seat to Wall Street as the record companies went public. The artists were now being sold out by the record companies and forced to figuratively kiss the asses of their corporate masters as these record companies went public. In essence, the artists were no longer the primary concern; what mattered now was keeping their stockholders fat and happy and "making the quarterly numbers"; the music itself was an afterthought. During the time of the upheaval wrought by SoundScan, BDS and the "Wall Streeting" of the industry, country music seized the opportunity and tacitly claimed the traditional music business. Country music has come to dominate the heartland of America, a landscape abandoned or ignored by the gatekeepers of rock and pop. Great new country music stars came from seemingly nowhere to grow to tremendous popularity, like Garth Brooks. While all this was going on, technology, just as it always does, progressed. That which, by all rights should have had a positive impact for all artists -- better sound quality, accessibility, and portability -- is now being blamed for many of the ills that beset the music business. The captains of the industry it seemed proved themselves incapable of having a broader, more long-range view of what this new technology offered. The music business is very complicated in itself so it's understandable that these additional elements were not dealt with coherently in light of the distractions that abound. Not understanding the possibilities, they ignorantly turned it into a nightmarish situation. The nightmare is the fact that they simply didn't know how to make it work for the artists and the consumers.

The CD, it should be noted, was born out of greed. It was devised to prop up record sales on the expectation of people replenishing their record collections with CDs of albums they had already purchased. They used to call this "planned obsolesce" in the car business. Sound quality was supposed to be one of the big selling points for CDs but, as we know, it wasn't very good at all. It was just another con, a get-rich-quick scheme, a monumental hoax perpetrated on the music consuming public. These days, some people suggest that it is up to the artist to create avenues to sell the music of his own creation, and in today's environment, is it realistic to expect someone to be a songwriter, recording artist, record company and the P.T. Barnum, so to speak, of his own career? It's amusing that a few people who have never made a record or written a song seem to know so much more about what an artist should be doing than the artist himself. If these people know so much, maybe they should make their own records and just leave artists out of it?

Now that the carnage in the music industry is so deep you can hardly wade through it, it's open season for criticizing artists, for making a misstep or trying to create new opportunities to reach an audience, as and example Bruce Springsteen releasing an album at Wal-Mart or Paul McCartney doing a deal with Starbucks. The old rules and constraints that had governed what was once considered a legitimate artist are no longer valid. When you think about it, you must conclude that there really is no legitimate business; there is no game left. So sadly, today, it's really a matter of "every man for himself." In terms of possibilities, artists are but an echo of what they once were. Of course, the artist does not want to "sell out to The Man." Left with no real choice except that business model of greed and the money counting mentality that Ronald Reagan propagated and the western countries embraced, there is only "The Man" to deal with. There is no street for the music to rise up from. There is no time for the music to develop in a natural way that we can all embrace when it ripens and matures. That's why the general public doesn't really care. It's not that the people don't still love music; of course they do. It's just the way it is presented to them that ignores their human side.

For any hope for survival of the music that everyone loves, compassion must replace name-calling, fairness must replace greed and everyone in the music industry needs to come together and try to understand each other's problems. Maybe artists should form an artist-driven record label, but trying to get artists and business people together to work for the common good of everyone involved is like herding cats. When all is said and done, unfortunately, it's not really about the music or the artist. It's about you and your perception of yourself and how you think things ought to be. And we all know that this very rarely intersects with what actually is. Just because you think this is how it should be only makes it just that: what you think; it doesn't make it true. KryKey Personal Web Radio, WCUT Radio and Developmental Sound Labs are doing just that, being fair to independent artists, having compassion for independent artists, putting their best foot forward and working together for the common good of independent artists.

(please note: this has been written from information by JM)

Australian Rock Net Radio playing Aussie Rock n Roll

The foundations of rock 'n' roll in Australia were laid during the Second World War when American servicemen brought the "jumpin' jive" of artists like Louis Jordan to Australia. The other basic component of rock 'n' roll, country "hillbilly" music, was already well established here in Australia. When the two came together in the mid-1950s, the new music quickly found an Australian audience and performers. The trigger was Bill Haley's performance of Rock around the Clock. Performers Allan Dale and the house rockers, Johnny OKeefe and the Dee Jays performed in the sytyle of Bill Haley and the Comets, Allan Dale was more a big band singer with a sophisticated and tuneful style but Johnny O'Keefe was where Australian Rock N Roll, raw and brash started forging it's roots playing in rough, brawling pubs and county towns.

My father now in his 60's is still a big JOK fan, but loves what it became. Lets jump a Generation I'm in my early forties and I grew up with Rose Tattoo and Angry Anderson, Angus Young and Australia's favourites AC /DC who are almost single handedly responsible for Australian rock & roll today. The sight of Angus sitting on top of Bon Scott's shoulders wrestling with is guitar is a sight burned into the Australian music lover's psyche and what Australian Rock n Roll has evolved into and how it will always be remembered.

Australian Rock Net Radio is a tribute the legends of Australian Rock and Roll. Tune in, and enjoy the best Rock n Roll in the world from the Land Down Under.

Hear it now on www.KryKey.com - your Personal Web Radio 24/7

(written by Big Stu, Australian Rock Net Radio, Perth, Australia)

Machette is now on KryKey Personal Web Radio

MACHETTE The Cleaner
AGE: 33
PLACE OF ORIGIN: QUEENS, NEW YORK OCCUPATION: HIP-HOP ARTIST, CEO, HERO

HISTORY: Machette was raised in the South Jamaica Queens zone in NY. He lived the average life of a Queens kid till he turned 15. It is said that this is when he realized something was wrong ....with everything! It was that feeling tt "something wasn't right" that compelled him to search for the truth. It was this period in his life that he realized who he was and what his purpose on earth was. Machette's logic was "whatever is going on is not natural, so that means someone is doing this". That realizaton plus his love for hip hop gave birth to the voice we now hear coming through tohusands of speakers around the globe. His childhood took place in the 80's so He feels that he and Hip Hop "grew up together" but he was a listener, a fan at first. Until one da He said to himself " heyyyy, I can write something better than that!" And he's been "writing something better than that ever since"!. It was around this time in his life also that he and his best friend known as Q, decided that the only difference between them and the heroes in comic books was MONEY! So they started a group they called the Assassinz Guild. They chose to use numbers as names so MACHETTE chose to be #2 and Q took on the #1. Then, It was over....MACHETTE HAD A CREW NOW! From that pont he went from school yard to school yard, lunch tables to staircases to stages you name it, he went on a battle rampage. This is one of the more interesting FACTS about MACHETTE, to this day he hasn't lost a battle yet! He told us he could offer $1000 to the person that saw him lose a battle and the money wouldn't move!

But then around the age of 26, he moved to Raleigh North Carolina where he met a man named JOHN J. MITCHELL III. One day riding around in the truck MACHETTE decides to throw in a tape (yes, cassette tape) of an album he was working on. Of course it was gritty and on a tape the sound quality was to laugh at but John noticed that this brother had some damn skills! In the blink of an eye, John became MACHETTE's manager and during a Saturday lunch MACHETTE was doodling on a napkin and it came to him... "Assassin Records!". He said it again to himself "Asaassin Records!". John heard him and said "you wanna do it?", MACHETTE replied "i don't give a f**k, I'm not scared! let's do it!". Then months later they were in and out of studios working on MACHETTE's first Album ever which he called "STRATEGO", based on a war board game.

Assassin recordz flopped due to multiple reasons, then he turned to the streetz "hardbody" as some would say. He sold everything but furniture and the idea hit him to just cut out ALL of the middle men in the industry and just go outside and sell cds!

That was the birth of his pride and joy project ""BLACKMARKET MUZIC". The concept is that an artist always has and always will have the right to sell something he creates without any interference. MUSIC BEING NO EXCEPTION!

So now MACHETTE is leading a revolution where the Artists regain control of the arts! NOW HE'S ON THE AIR, IT'S CALLED WCUT RADIO.... BEWARE!

Check out Machette's music on www.KryKey.com and if your an Artist or Band, create your own Personal Web Radio Station at KryKey Personal Web Radio and promote your music.