One decree puts smaller web radio ventures out of business. Now another decree would put them back in.

Which one is "right?" The one that gives you market pricing, of course. If in the presence of a market, the little stations would be in business, then that is "right." If not, well, then, consumers and other ventures are better off if the investments in web radio went somewhere else instead. Okay, well, which one is that? Really no way to tell in the absence of a market. Which the legislation in question does absolutely nothing to further. (Arguably, sadly, the formula that would put them out of business is probably on the right track, as the earlier formula is pretty close to free-riding).

How do we get to a market? a) Web radio ventures need to be liable for unauthorized casts, or their is nothing to bring them to the bargaining table. b) Licenses cannot be too fragmented (which they are), or webcasters have to negotiate with too many parties at once and deal with holdouts.

This fragmentation of licensing, not substituting decrees for decrees, is the level at which legislators should be dealing with the problem. Otherwise, leave it alone!

Second best solutions? (Once pathetic little businesses start up in reliance on the compulsory licensing, it is too late for the first-best solutions). Throw the parties into fast-track BINDING arbitration. Come up with some institutions solutions to address the fragmentation of licensing.

Argh! But fix the problem so the NEXT technology that comes along doesn't run into the same thing.