Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Spotify royalties: Wow.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default Spotify royalties: Wow.

    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Berkeley CA
    Posts
    1,874

    Default

    I think the comments were even more depressing than the orig article. I really love the one that says that songwriting (etc) isn't any kind of work so why should people get paid for it. It is interesting to me that the music business, already set up to efficiently pillage artists and writers, has now been further colonized by the digital/online biz that pretty much reduces the content creator's cut to zero. Online music businesses have made selling music a WORSE deal for artists than the legendary manager/accountant swindles of the 1950's and '60s. I also see that creating things like i-Apps seems to enrich Apple (etc) pretty much entirely.

    philp

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts
    1,599

    Default

    I think it was the first time I've seen anyone mention it in the context of human rights.

    If this was about wages in a third world country would it get more attention?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    The Wolverine State
    Posts
    7,157

    Default

    So... I'll play Gomer Pyle and fully admit I have no actual clue what's going on there.

    Who exactly is giving them the rights to stream the music and, whomever that is, what exactly was their incentive for doing that? My assumption is that they can't stream the music without some legal rights allowing that... so... who (beside the streaming company) is benefiting from it and if nobody else actually is, what is the purpose of allowing them to stream it in the first place?

    To say that there is an "informational" gap of sorts in that story is a huge understatement.

    Anyone care to fill in the missing bits? As a business person, record company exec, whomever signed a contract with the streamer... what exactly was - or was supposed to be - in it for them?

    I clearly don't get it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Franklin, TN
    Posts
    14,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
    So... I'll play Gomer Pyle and fully admit I have no actual clue what's going on there.

    Who exactly is giving them the rights to stream the music and, whomever that is, what exactly was their incentive for doing that? My assumption is that they can't stream the music without some legal rights allowing that... so... who (beside the streaming company) is benefiting from it and if nobody else actually is, what is the purpose of allowing them to stream it in the first place?

    To say that there is an "informational" gap of sorts in that story is a huge understatement.

    Anyone care to fill in the missing bits? As a business person, record company exec, whomever signed a contract with the streamer... what exactly was - or was supposed to be - in it for them?

    I clearly don't get it.
    I fully agree with you here. Ostensibly, what is in it for the artist is the "exposure", but I am sick and tired of artists who grant a license to Spotify (or others) and then turn and complain like crazy about the low rates and act as if they are being taken advantage of. Surely they read the contract and knew what they were agreeing to. It's as if they know they need to be in the brothel to make money, and they know the rules of the brothel and the going rates, but when they get their paycheck they act as if they are getting whore'd out by the brothel owner. Makes no sense to me either...
    Todd Robbins
    TX3 Productions, Inc.
    www.toddro.com

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Franklin, TN
    Posts
    14,647

    Default

    Also, it is amazing to me that people are still trying to figure out how to make money by selling physical product or downloads, when the wave of the future is slapping us right square in the face. The market is just days away from moving to a majority streaming-based model, and no one seams to cognizant of that. Furthermore, no one seems to know how to monetize it from the artists' / songwriters' perspective.
    Todd Robbins
    TX3 Productions, Inc.
    www.toddro.com

  7. #7
    Bill@WelcomeHomeStudios's Avatar
    Bill@WelcomeHomeStudios is offline 3D VIP 2004, '05, '07, '08, '09, '10, '11, '12
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    5,065

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd Robbins View Post
    Also, it is amazing to me that people are still trying to figure out how to make money by selling physical product or downloads, when the wave of the future is slapping us right square in the face. The market is just days away from moving to a majority streaming-based model, and no one seams to cognizant of that. Furthermore, no one seems to know how to monetize it from the artists' / songwriters' perspective.
    Not exactly true. Several European countries have stronger laws and enforcement than the US. What hurts us is that in the US we seem to think that the internet is 'different' and therefore not subject to the same rules or laws that protect copyrights in any other media. And a part of what hurts us in the US is that somewhere in the past, radio got special treatment. (Radio is, after all, streaming.) The really big deal here is that these streaming services want to get the content for free, but they want to make money. I don't understand how that seems reasonable and fair to anyone, unless somewhere along the line we get the grocer and the utilities and health care and the car companies to all chip in so that songwriters and musicians don't have any living expenses. Then I'd see where their creations maybe should be free for all to use however they want. Streaming services are no different in performance than radio, and should need to make their money however they can do it, but their content should be an expense, not provided free at the expense of songwriters and musicians.
    Bill Park
    Welcome Home Studios

    The elites have squandered the country's wealth on two of the costliest and most useless wars in American history while blithely pretending that the environmental crisis doesn't exist. We no longer have any mechanisms within the formal structures of power that will protect or advance our rights.
    (Chris Hedges)


    Showbusiness. We're all here because we're not all there.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default

    This is good. Units per month for a music writer to make minimum wage:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...-graph/249267/
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  9. #9
    PookyNR is offline 3D VIP 2005, '06, '07, '08, '09, '10, '11, '12, '13, '14
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    Posts
    6,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd Robbins View Post
    Furthermore, no one seems to know how to monetize it from the artists' / songwriters' perspective.
    That is where opportunity lies for someone to get exceedingly rich. Figure out that problem, be the first in line, cha-ching $$$!
    Am I the only one without a small type signature?

    Nathan

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Franklin, TN
    Posts
    14,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill@WelcomeHomeStudios View Post
    Not exactly true. Several European countries have stronger laws and enforcement than the US. What hurts us is that in the US we seem to think that the internet is 'different' and therefore not subject to the same rules or laws that protect copyrights in any other media. And a part of what hurts us in the US is that somewhere in the past, radio got special treatment. (Radio is, after all, streaming.) The really big deal here is that these streaming services want to get the content for free, but they want to make money. I don't understand how that seems reasonable and fair to anyone, unless somewhere along the line we get the grocer and the utilities and health care and the car companies to all chip in so that songwriters and musicians don't have any living expenses. Then I'd see where their creations maybe should be free for all to use however they want. Streaming services are no different in performance than radio, and should need to make their money however they can do it, but their content should be an expense, not provided free at the expense of songwriters and musicians.
    Read up on the DMCA and other bills passed by the US Congress between 1998 and 2008...
    Todd Robbins
    TX3 Productions, Inc.
    www.toddro.com

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is Spotify legit?
    By 3daudioinc in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-06-2012, 05:23 AM
  2. Spotify
    By Todd Robbins in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-22-2011, 02:48 AM
  3. Ringtone Royalties
    By Lawrence in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 06:38 PM
  4. How Will They Figure Out Royalties for This?
    By Wireline in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-01-2008, 01:46 PM
  5. OT.. Anybody here getting royalties?
    By GZsound in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-04-2006, 10:21 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •