c3 ‪”#thatsongwhen 10k people listened, the artist got paid $60 and the major labels got stock options.”

c3, The Content Creators Coalition is enlisting musicians and songwriters to share their true stories of Spotify plays, payments and thoughts to raise awareness around unsustainable digital service royalty structures. Join in.

If you care about the economic rights of artists in the digital domain, join us in hijacking Spotify’s new twitter hashtag campaign. Got your own numbers to share? Like so: Fun with new Spotify hashtag campaign: “#thatsongwhen 10k people listened, the artist got paid $60 and the major labels got stock options.”

We do believe in digital. But current rates are not sustainable. Spotify is using our music like venture capital and promising better returns later while they pay their employees and hire expensive ad firms to create the above hashtag campaign.

thatsongwhenSarahManningthatsongwhenTessaMakesLove thatsongwhenMarilynCarino


2 thoughts on “c3 ‪”#thatsongwhen 10k people listened, the artist got paid $60 and the major labels got stock options.”

  1. Hi! Ellen Shipley here! I am the songwriter, who in November of 2012, “outed Pandora” as the true Criminals, Thieves, Liars, they are–by publishing my BMI Royalty Statement for a three month period,– that showed I was paid- $39.41 for 3.2 MILLION STREAMS of my song (which I co wrote)–“HEAVEN IS A PLACE ON EARTH”. It helped stir the sleeping nest of a scared, and always manipulated by– fear of getting no cuts by artists– songwriting community– to step forward in Congress (where Pandora was attempting to CUT the songwriter’s royalty rate even LOWER than zero)… and help put an end to that disgusting maneuver. However, unfortunately, the shameful, tragic, illegal and completely reprehensible policy of “HOW ABOUT LET”S PLAY MURDER THE SONGWRITER”– as orchestrated and carried out by the Internet Devil Children–( Pandora and Spotify) –continues to spread like a contagious disease amongst other streaming sites who also profit off the backs of Songwriters taking their pay
    WHY? BECAUSE the US GOvernment does NOT Stop Them–



    “Heaven Is A Place On Earth-“—streamed 418,000 times—–SPOTIFY paid– $43.41
    (50% cowriter)

    “I Drive Myself Crazy”————–streamed 84,465 times——SPOTIFY paid–$5.85

    I have songs that received 43,000 streams; and 40,000 streams and on and on

    I got a few dollars here and there


    I just got a check for FIFTEEN CENTS FROM GOOGLE!

    SPOTIFY< PANDORA< YOUTUBE< all demonic children of the GOOGLE DOG
    and their ongoing rape of content reators.

    A little tidbit maybe known or not known:

    The Record Labels( the supporters of all Songwriters) have an 18% owner interest in SPOTIFY…..really? Really…..

    BREATHE IN on that one….
    TUrning green?
    KInd of makes you want to ……you know….

    I remain as positive as sanity will allow me to be…that someone with power will stop all these BAD< BAD< people from the ongoing lining of those endless the deep pockets of our lobbyists, and Justices,etc CHA CHING CHA CHING

    Are songwriters still citizens protected by the Constitution of this Country?



  2. One of the reasons, so many of us are opposed to streaming, is that by offering their services for free, for so long, not only have they contributed to the perception that music has no value, they have also created a nearly insurmountable task of converting their free subscribers to paid.

    As far as controlling the process, the recent ruling in favor of copyright holders being paid for pre-1972 songs is major and may collapse an already tenuous company, Pandora. Pandora isn’t focussed on making money by converting their subscribers from free to paying, their focussed on exploiting loopholes to pay less for music.

    Any artist who can sell music and has a new release would be foolish not to delay the release of their new songs on Spotify and other streaming services and this has been proven over and over again. If Spotify can float an IPO and becomes temporarily flush with cash, they will pay more artists for new releases. While they can.

    The future of music doesn’t rest with a digital delivery service, but rather the creators. If the creators cannot afford to work as songwriters and musicians any perceived victory that technology my claim will be a false one. The authors get this as more and more of them take a stand against Amazon.

    For fifteen years the digital community has talked about the benefits of exposure and the promise of alternative channels of income. For the most part these have not panned out and have only proven that musicians and songwriters survive when they can sell their recorded music.

    The fans didn’t demand streaming any more than the fans demanded piracy. It was a free way to get music, not a revolution; people saw a way to make money off artists.

Comments are closed.