Infringement should not be a business model.
On September 29th, the United States District Court in Manhattan found Grooveshark guilty of massive copyright infringement, and specifically named CEO Sam Tarantino and CTO Josh Greenberg as bad actors. Now, the curtains are starting to drop: just days after that decision was rendered, federal judge Thomas Griesa issued another decision that removed all doubt that the plaintiffs — a total of 9 recording labels — had triumphed in the case.
READ THE FULL POST AT DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
Quoting from todays ruling:
“While the Court is largely unpersuaded and sometimes baffled by Sirius XM’s repetitive or off-point theories about how reasonable jurists might read an unwritten exclusion into § 980(a)(2), the Court will not analyze the potential grounds for difference of opinion because certification of this Order suffers from an even more basic deficiency. At this stage in the litigation and under the operative scheduling order governing the case, certification of the Order for immediate appeal would delay rather than materially advance the termination of the litigation; therefore, the Court denies the motion.”
The record industry has completely disconnected the relationship between artists and their fans whereby the artists catalog is now an aggregated asset to leverage (the label’s) equity in a tech start up that is subsidized by musicians. Not cool.
This is an excellent piece by Sharky Laguna that looks at how all models utilizing divisible revenue pools are fundamentally unfair to the relationship between the artist and the fan. In short, the plays by each consumer should be compensating ONLY the artists that, that person plays (makes sense, right?). Further more 100% of the consumers subscription fee should only pay the artists that individual listens too – no matter how few or how many plays the consumer gives each artist.
Under this proposed revised accounting method, each consumer is once again reconnected directly to the artists they chose to support. This is exactly the kind of thinking that should be happening at the labels and music tech companies.
In a nutshell: Royalties should be paid based on subscriber share, not overall play share.
If I pay $10 and during that month I listen exclusively to Butchers Of The Final Frontier, then that band should get 100% of the royalties. I didn’t listen to anyone else, so no one else should get a share of the $7 that will be paid out as royalties from my subscription fee.
Please read the full post at MEDIUM:
Since we published the Streaming Price Bible we’ve been getting data submissions to crunch the numbers. According to one set of data it appears Spotify is reporting seven different streaming rates (in a single month). But the most interesting discovery in the data is the percentage of free streaming volume and revenue versus paid streaming volume and revenue.
We knew there were two price tiers (Free & Paid) but we didn’t anticipate discovering the other five tiers, even as limited as they are.
As we had suspected, the majority of consumption is generating the least amount of revenue.
Oh, and for those of you keeping score at home the net summed per stream rate, for all streams divided by all revenue is .00352 in the aggregate. That’s .00169 per stream LESS than reported earlier this year in the Streaming Price Bible of .00521. Just another indication that as streaming models mature the price per stream will continue to drop. Add to this that even Spotify executives have admitted as much.
If you have data that looks different than ours, send it our way and let us crunch it. This is the problem when there is such a profound lack of openess and transparency. There also appears to be an overall lack of consistency. Let’s have some real “disruptive innovation” by “sharing” our Spotify statements and comparing the numbers.
[The per play rates noted above are aggregated. In all cases the total amount of revenue is divided by the total number of the streams per service (ex: $5,210 / 1,000,000 = .00521 per stream). Multiple tiers and pricing structures are all summed together and divided to create an averaged, single rate per play.]
Forget exploitative pay from Spotify! Do you want your music on YouTube Music? Will you be alongside Hate rock songs? Jihadi Recruitment Music Videos? Probably. YouTube is full of this vile stuff. And we let our kids watch YouTube?