When it comes to an FM tuner mandate for smartphones, it's never entirely clear who is going to take what position at any given moment. Here's the latest development—the Recording Industry Association of America is supporting Representative Darrell Issa's (R-CA) resolution asking Congress to "oppose any mandate for the inclusion of terrestrial broadcast radio tuners in the manufacture or sale of mobile devices, which would stifle innovation, competition, and consumer choice."

The resolution is co-sponsored by Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and would put the kibosh on what at one point last year looked like the Grand Compromise between big content and the broadcasters over the Performance Rights Act. Radio stations would agree to pay performers royalties when their works are broadcast over radio stations, and the stations would get a Congressionally-required FM tuner in mobiles in return.

It seemed like the music labels were pretty cozy on this idea, last we checked. The RIAA-backed musicFIRST coalition said it was definitely on board. "As regards the chip, this is a key issue for the radio industry," the group told Ars late last summer. "musicFIRST, too, likes FM chips in cell phones, PDAs, etc. It gives consumers access to more music choices."

This infuriated the Consumer Electronics Association. "Rather than adapt to the digital marketplace, NAB and RIAA act like buggy-whip industries that refuse to innovate and seek to impose penalties on those that do," the CEA's Gary Shapiro declared—although the trade group later hinted that it would go along with the idea if it had to.

But that deal fell apart, and now everybody on the content/mobile side is a happy family again, it appears. The CEA, CTIA—The Wireless Association, and the RIAA have put out a joint statement praising the House resolution against a chip requirement.

Zero sense

"Every platform in the industrialized world respects property rights but one—terrestrial radio in the US," says RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol. "So the idea of the government rigging the playing field to expand the scope of the existing taking makes zero sense. That's why we welcome this resolution and the broader concept of policies that reward technical and creative innovation."

In fact, you'd never know these groups ever warmed to the concept after reading the supporting statement of Neil Portnow, president of the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences: "The music community wants to see the growth of distribution platforms that compensate musicians and performers. The most exciting new mobile devices are also the distribution platforms that fully compensate musicians and performers. FM Radio, by contrast, does not."

The statement says that 150 prominent musicians have also joined the no-FM chip cause. But these commentaries also suggest that while the FM tuner mandate appears headed for the dumpster—the PRA is still a going cause. Issa, it should be noted, was one of the original sponsors of the legislation, which has fizzled out over the last few Capitol Hill seasons, despite efforts to find common ground.

His and Eshoo's resolution would appear to keep the performance royalties flame alive, as these preliminary "whereas"-es suggest:

Whereas the United States should provide fair and meaningful protection for artists, creators, and innovators; Whereas copyrights need to be supported to encourage creative development; Whereas Internet, satellite, and cable radio support the creation of new music by compensating the artists whose talent and hard work are at the core of the music and the investors who support them and bring their music to the public . . .

Killing your home town

Of late, the Obama administration has reiterated its support for the PRA. White House Intellectual Property Coordinator Victoria Espinel issued a set of copyright protection recommendations in March.

"Finally," read the last, "we recommend creating a right of public performance for copyright owners for sound recordings transmitted by over-the-air broadcast stations which, in part, will allow copyright owners to obtain overseas royalties that are now denied to them."

But this brought a quick rebuke from the National Association of Broadcasters. "NAB remains unalterably opposed to legislation creating an onerous, jobs-killing fee on America's hometown radio stations without offsetting provisions and benefits that recognize the unparalleled promotional value of radio airplay," the organization's Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton warned.

"The NAB offered a legislative package to resolve this issue last year, which was summarily rejected by the musicFirst Coalition," the statement added. "Our offer still stands."