Mashable - The Social Media Guide - Latest Comments in GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Sonya A. Willis — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:17:54 -0000

Accidentally hit the I like button because I don't. "Performers should only be paid for live performances" is one of the stupidest comments I have ever seen. How about you don't get paid unless the product or service your company makes actually sells and can be attributed to you?

You prove that you know nothing about what it takes to make make music and should really keep quiet and enjoy the creativity of talented people.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Kid Cork — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:07:41 -0000

While I agree that the internet has polarized much of the music industry, I would disagree that it has completely eliminated the "middle class" of musicians. There are still plenty of local only names that aren't ridiculously popular and wealthy, but not an average bar band. Living in Colorado, I get to see a lot of them, like the Boulder Acoustic Society, Opie Gone Bad, ect.

I do agree that we need to distinguish between publishing companies like ASCAP/BMI and labels though, Their workings are very different, if not always there motives. Solid points though friends!

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

payphone — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:23:38 -0000

If by "their music" you mean the songs ASCAP and BMI represent, there's a bit of a problem there-- these two PROs represent just about every song ever written in the US. Aside from small percentage of songs published through the third American PRO (SESAC) and those by international artists, what you're talking about is akin to removing all songs from iTunes.

There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding here about what ASCAP and BMI are, and what they do. Robbi is correct-- this is not a music label issue. Calling artists, labels, and publishers greedy at this point seems a little ridiculous. Hard to think of an industry that's been stolen from more ubiquitously, and with less remorse.

Might as well debunk the myth that the current model has leveled the playing field for artists big and small. While it's true that your local garage band can distribute their music much like a major label artist (iTunes, Rhapsody, etc.) the revenue gap between small artist and big artist is just as wide-- but what's really upsetting is that the digital music model has virtually eliminated the "middle class" of musicians-- bands that could expect to move 100,000 albums or so (enough to make a living) are now lucky to move 10,000 (enough to cover costs... and thats it). Meanwhile the top 00.01% of artists are the beneficiaries of the lion's share of new revenue streams (ringtones, etc.) and as always, those very same PROs (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC) only reward that same top 00.01% with performance royalties from radio and live performance. That's because the PROs don't pay artists based on how many times their songs are played on the radio, it's too much data to track. So they simply pay a sampling of the MOST played songs on a sampling of "A" playlists across the country. That means Kanye gets paid, but your favorite indie band doesn't. Same thing with live concert royalties-- BMI only pays royalties to the top 10 grossing tours of the fiscal year. Everyone else gets nothing, no matter how many shows they played. The royalty system, plus the digital delivery model simply ensures that mid-level acts will remain broke, no matter their popularity. Indie cred and 1,000,000 myspace friends simply do not pay bills.

Apologies for the long-winded missive. I'm one of the lucky ones whose music DOES pay the bills. Thought this page deserved a different point of view.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

sevenwhitehorses — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:02:59 -0000

wow, the whole reason i buy music on line is i can see if it is something i will enjoy. it even generates, about 50% of the time, me buying the 'cd' at the store for a gift. if they manage to prevent this or charge for it i'll just go back to listening to my old collection.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Sei deMarks — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:52:35 -0000

In their efforts to squeeze every penny from the digital music landscape, the PRO's are beginning to sound suspiciously like the double-think government officials in Orwell's 1984. Royalties for a 30 second preview - Huh? Performance fees for a digital download - Huh?
Next they'll want performance and digital download fees when we sing the songs in our heads.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Nico Thom — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:31:57 -0000

remember the times when you bought music in a record store? you would be able to listen into the albums with headphones - not limited to 30 sec per track. a service leading to purchase of music. now would anybody charge the record store for the minutes of music played? stupid approach, biting the hand that feeds you...

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Spoonerism — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:04:39 -0000

Amber, I can see your logic. But really? For a thirty second clip? by charging royalties for every thirty second preview, ASCAP and BMI will make billions, and Apple will be forced to ratchet up Itunes prices even more. The average listener, as I know from talking to most of my friends and people here in Missoula, basically won't pay more than a dollar for a download already. So you're looking at a trade off. Yes you may make less money from an individual song, but the free preview attracts more listeners in the end (provided the music's good o'course). Seeing that this is the day and age of the single, you're going to want to sell volume and keep prices low to ensure that. Walmart tactics, yes they're scuzzy, but they work.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Spoonerism — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:12:16 -0000

Pathetic is all I can say. As a musician, and avid listener of music I can say that this is desperate greed at its worst.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Vincent — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:17:47 -0000

That's only possible because the music industry doesn't allow others to sell real mp3's on a big scale. If they would do that for a better price and with HQ mp3's, Apple will loose that dictatorship within a year! The music industry makes Apple this strong!

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Vincent — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 11:12:49 -0000

Perhaps it's not GREED, it's desperation. Of course you are right by saying Apple has got a cut too big for their share in the process, but that does not mean ASCAP and BMI are right in this matter. Apple isn't stating that they are protectors of the rights of musicians, ASCAP and BMI are stating that. They should pay you as a musician for the downloads on iTunes. If this goes through, I don't think you will see more than a dime of the money they will collect.
You say 30 second clips ARE technically public performances, but that isn't necessarily true, because when played, most people won't be in a public place, therefore it isn't a public performance (not talking of the fact there is no performance at all of course!).
New business models are rising while the old fall down. This one will fall down, sooner or later! It all starts with loosing 'goodwill' and that's just what they accomplish by actions like these. Stop seeing live performances as promotion for your albums and start seeing it the other way around, albums and mp3's are for promoting your live performances (the actual labor!). That is one of the models from the past that will come back in the future! Don't be afraid of that change, but go with it!

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Jason Rukus — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:48:12 -0000

You went way to deep into that! I was just comparing it in a general sense, superficial comparison.

I am sure my musician friends would hate me for saying this but I would do away with the entire royalty system. Not surprisingly I am also against pensions. People should not continue to get paid for something they did 5 years ago, it's bred laziness.

How about this one, I don't pay my plumber every time I flush my toilet!

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Jim Goodrich — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:17:12 -0000

True, Kraft doesn't get paid every time an ad airs, but the talent does, Every voice over artist or actor that appears in that commercial gets residuals every time that commercial airs. And they have unions like SAG and AFTRA, not Performance Rights Organizations that control those payment arrangements and how they're disbursed.

And one other thing happens every time that commercial airs, Kraft pays for it, otherwise the commercial wouldn't air at all. A better analogy would be Free samples in a store, but then again Kraft still pays for that...and they also budget for it. It's only free to the consumer. Using this analogy, should artists have to pay for every 30 second preview played? I don't think so.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Amber Blahnik — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:22:49 -0000

As a professional musician this is not necessarily a GREEDy move as you so put it. ASCAP and BMI are actually responsible for making sure that the artists get paid when their life's work is publicly performed. Digital music download hubs such as iTunes are often used for public performance. I've used iTunes many a time to show my friends a song I was talking about. 30 second clips ARE technically public performances and artists should get paid for it. Apple makes billions of dollars and I think can afford to pay ASCAP and BMI a few cents every time a song is played. Artists don't make ANY money on digital downloads through iTunes because of how much they take out. Digital distribution is a big joke for musicians and I hope to see it get better in the future where artists get at least SOME compensation when their work is heard on the Web. I think this could possible be a really good thing for musicians if it's done right.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Dimple Thakkar — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:07:00 -0000

I work in the industry. It is full of panic, desperation, and instability. This may hurt them more than help them.

- Dimple Thakkar
www.synhergyentertainment.com

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Shaun Michael MacDonald — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:58:30 -0000

Tis the nature of the taxman to tax everything, but the industry is dumbstruck in a mode of saying they want to win back the youth and play nice in the morning, while coming out with this bully shit in the afternoon.

The indignation of this article suits the story. Let the lawyers wear it, find a scapegoat, and retreat. When will the business leaders get in front of this war with their own consumers and technology inventors?

Our team at www.mashuparts.com believe that Fair Use must be protected, and the only model that will work is one where they is a lot more legal "free" music, clips and discovery opportunities, and that the "free" is always coupled with upsell offers for premium content.

Shaun

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Musician — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:35:34 -0000

Consider this. Radio, TV, Malls, Elevators, Bars, Restaurants all have to pay royalties to ASCAP, BMI (non-profit organizations that represent songwriters and music publishers, by the way). To suggest that websites that earn revenue from advertising shouldn't have to pay royalties for music is inconsistent.

MySpace, and other websites that have "free" music, sell advertising on their pages. So, MySpace is making money, bands and musicians aren't.

Apple is making money by selling computers/iPods/iPhones. Their primary way of selling these products is iTunes.

Apple keeps 30% of everything sold on iTunes (it's a dictatorship, not a democracy for free music). Apple dictates the price of the songs. Apple requires that artists make single songs available instead of entire albums. Apple is a mega-corporation. Why shouldn't Apple have to pay royalties on song samples?

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Universal Indie Records — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 13:22:25 -0000

"— since when did it become smart business to spend time and money actively preventing your potential customers from finding out if they want to give you money"

That said it all right there.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Daniel Hahn — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:55:59 -0000

Un-frickin-believable. If they do this, the trend downward in piracy will go back up. It's not like the music industry is hurting for money!

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Peter — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:23:35 -0000

And while the music industry is at it, they should charge record stores for letting customers listen albums they were interested in buying. I guess this is what happens when an industry is run by attorneys. Sheesh, what a bunch of morons.

What we really need is a way for artists to connect directly to listeners and bypass these parasites.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Gins — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:18:57 -0000

The major labels have fought the digital revolution tooth & nail. The infamous Wired interview Doug Morris (head of Universal) a couple of years ago summed it up when he declared that they didn't have anyone internally who understood the internet, especially Napster, when it first broke. Hard to find an internet expert in NYC, Doug...
Anyway-rather than embracing digital technology, the labels have desperately tried to shoehorn their existing business model into this newfangled interweb, with dismal results. Suing customers, charging exorbitant licensing fees on streaming, raising prices on iTunes, seeking legislative assistance to repeal radio's performance tax (radio is another industry committing suicide btw)...it's all a giant fail on the labels' part. Making it more onerous on your potential consumers to sample music prior to purchase is just one more example of desperate greed replacing common sense. Perhaps the label heads should create a partnership with Procter & Gamble so that they may research more futile ways to squeeze the toothpaste back into the tube...

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Steven Finch — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 06:28:06 -0000

This just shows that the major labels and organisations still dont have any idea what they are doing.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Craig — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:14:54 -0000

I am just waiting for them to shut Grooveshark down. I use it for hours everyday. Best place for free music, although you can't download anything.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

doctorparadox — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:54:47 -0000

I tried to be very clear in the article who is leading this charge: ASCAP and BMI. However, to imply that ASCAP and BMI are not a part of the "music industry" is also not accurate. Nor do I see the labels up in arms opposing what the licensing wing of the music industry is doing.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

doctorparadox — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:51:38 -0000

The artists are getting a cut though, because they get a mechanical licensing fee to use the recording in the TV or film in the first place. Sometimes the additional broadcast performance fee when the TV show airs is referred to as "double dipping" because of this. If the TV show is streamed, the artists still gets the double dip performance fee -- but if it's a download they don't.

Re: GREED: Music Industry Wants Royalties on 30-Second Previews and TV Downloads

Robin Reekers — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:38:49 -0000

What a bunch of crap... Don't they realize they are killing the music industry with this ridiculous fees? This will only drive more people into pirating. Man, times have changed. I do agree that artists should get paid for their work, but how many Ferrari's do those guys need? If you don't innovate, your business dies... This has always been the case and will always be. Quit whining and start innovating. Times have changed, this is not the 80's!