It seems as though record companies have developed a new game plan in order to collect royalties. As we all know, the music industry attempted to sue individual users who illegally downloaded songs. But because of this approach to recover from major fiscal loss has destroyed their public image.

Rather than lowering the cost of albums in order to compete with free music circulating through the internet, record companies have turned to collection agencies who are now suing cellphone companies over royalties from ring tones. They contested that ring tones counted as public performances and therefore cell phone companies should be obligated to pay performance fees. The courts quickly shot this down.

Despite this unsuccessful attempt to collect on royalties, Broadcast Music Inc is now suing T-Mobile over ring back tones, claiming that the mobile carrier is selling them without licensing agreements. Unlike ring tones, which play out loud when someone calls a cellphone, ring back tones play specifically to the person calling. In other words, instead of hearing a cellphone dialing, the caller will hear a song that was chosen by the cell owner.

Music lovers are quick to point out the contradictory nature of this lawsuit. If ringtones that can be heard by anyone around a cellphone that is being called, do not equate to a public performance, it seems absurd to sue the mobile carriers over a ringback tone that can be heard only by the caller. Record companies seem to be grasping at straws as they suffer from huge financial losses.

It does not seem that the idea of lowering the cost of CDs and DVDs has occurred to the record companies. There are still a large number of music lovers out there who would rather collect and own the media, but with prices constantly rising, downloading music for free seems more and more tempting. CDs are generally priced at seventeen dollars.

Some bands have been avoiding the issue of music downloading through different tactics. Radiohead, an alternative rock band, created a website where fans are allowed to download the music for free, or for a donation. Nine Inch Nails’ Trent Reznor has created a similar website. Keeping record companies’ unsuccessful lawsuits and declining public image in mind, it appears as though creative thinking and fair pricing may be more productive than bullying money out of mobile carriers and individual users.

Mallory Megan works for a debt collection company. She also composes stories on business and finance, consumer spending and collection agencies. This article, BMI Collection Agencies Turn To Ring Tones To Collect Royalties is available for free reprint.

Who doesn’t love a good text message? Painless, fast, and no talking over the phone to that irritating person you have to get in touch with! There is no arguing with the fact that texting is turning into a major conduit for the exchange of data. It is no wonder that there were almost 750 billion text messages sent in the United States last year, nearly twice the amount of text messages sent in 2008.

As far as debt collection goes, collection agents have remained outside of the cellular realm up to now. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was a hallmark federal law that took effect in 1978 and has set up strict guidelines about how debt collectors can call and when. Because this act is even older than the stereotypical “Saved By The Bell” cell phones from the early 90s, it just might be time to make some major adjustments to this antiquated law. But experts say that any change to this law would have to come from consumers looking for change, not the collectors.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, if a debt collector is to get in touch with a debtor they need to deliver what is known as a “mini-miranda” which is a statement that informs the consumer that the contact is an attempt to collect money. This leads to issues with the 160 character maximum length of many text messages. Another issue is determining who will pay for the text. Currently, there is no way for a collection agency to determine if a debtor has a plan that includes unlimited text messages. Can you imagine if you got a text message from a debt collector that you had to pay for? That would be outrageous and highly illegal!

Another potential problem for collection agents is being certain that the consumer definitely owns the cellphone. For example, the debtor may be using a company owned cell. That company could very well be monitoring the usage of the cellphone, which might lead to illegal third party disclosure issues if debt communications were sent by text.

Unfortunately for the collections industry, Congress needs to vote on the American budget, cap and trade, health care and many other issues first before it can get down and really tackle this text message issue. So it seems like time will tell.

Mallory Megan works for Rapid Recovery Solution and writes articles on credit collection agencies Check here for free reprint licence: In Time, You Might Just Get A Text From Your Bill Collector.

In part one of this series, I wrote about some of the pros and cons of mutual funds. I mentioned that there are numerous expenses that come with investing in a mutual fund, including the high price of management fees and brokerage fees that come with frequent trading. However, the fund manager is bound by a responsibility to find the best deals on commission for you that she or he can. Also, the expertise of a fund manager can be quite helpful for beginners when they start to invest.

Additionally, many mutual funds offer more than one class of shares. The way it works is this: each class invests in the same pool of securities and the investment objectives and policies are the same. However, each class has different shareholder services and distribution arrangements for different fees and expenses. So, if you pay more money for a higher class of share, you can expect different services, and better performance out of the mutual fund. This multi-class structure gives investors the capacity to pick their own fee that fits their investment goals best.

While all of these aspects of mutual funds are pros, critics return to the high cost of mutual funds as a big con. They are also quick to point out that the efficiency of mutual funds lack when compared to a simple index fund. An index fund will invest in companies that are part of major stock or bond indexes and therefore tries to profit from simply riding the market, while funds that are run by a manager attempt to outperform a relevant index through advanced stock picking techniques.

The assets of an index fund are geared to closely match the performance of a particular published index that shows positive trends. Because there will be little changes associated with a stock index, an index fund manager makes fewer trades than an active fund manager. Because of this, the management fee will be much less, and because there are fewer trades, there will be lower trading expenses. In fact, mutual funds have fees that are usually four times as much as those charged by index funds.

Additionally, evidence shows that mutual funds generally do not, in fact beat the market, and actually under-perform other portfolios with similar characteristics. One study showed that almost 1500 United States mutual funds underperformed the market in about half of the years between 1962 and 1992. What is more, analysis shows that funds that did well in the past aren’t able to beat the market again in the future. And perhaps what is worst is that even if your manager proves to be a dud, and your mutual fund does not do well, you will be stuck with a premium in fees – and often a large tax bill. Ultimately, it is a decision you should make after long thought and weighing all of the pros and cons, and not one that you should take lightly if your money is important to you.

Mallory Megan works for Rapid Recovery Solution and writes articles on credit collection agencies. Free reprint avaialable from: Are Mutual Funds Worth Your While? Part Two.