#irespectmusic Back on Capitol Hill with @RadioCleveKKG and @theblakemorgan

Music Technology Policy

Karoline Blake Ted D Congressman Ted Deutch, Karoline Kramer-Gould and Blake Morgan in Washington, DC

Who can forget Karoline Kramer-Gould’s courageous stand supporting artist pay for radio play against the MIC Coalition and the National Association of Broadcasters?  The former Music Director at WJCU is on Capitol Hill meeting with Members of Congress to give them her point of view in support of the Fair Play Fair Pay Act that would guarantee fair compensation for artists played on terrestrial radio.

That would be all artists–because Fair Play Fair Pay closes the “Pandora loophole” that allows Pandora and Sirius to stiff artists recording before 1972 and their heirs.

We all owe Karoline a big vote of thanks for sticking her neck out against the NAB, Pandora, Sirius, Google and the rest of the MIC Coalition.

Congressman Ted Deutch is a great supporter of artist rights and holds a sign that is itself a play on…

View original post 8 more words

Weekly Top Three Artist Rights Stories

Music Technology Policy

The top three artist rights stories this week in review

1. Blake Morgan’s Must Read Huffington Post Op-Ed, “Why Music Makers Are the Real American Innovators:  If you are sick and tired of being talked down to, called a Luddite, ignored, demeaned and exploited by The Man 2.0 in the Grey Flannel Suit, you’ll love Blake’s latest homerun op-ed:

Music makers don’t require a lesson on American innovation at all.

We know all about American innovation.

Rock & Roll is an American innovation. Hip-Hop is an American innovation. Jazz isan American innovation. Blues, Country, Gospel, Bluegrass, each of these — and so many others — are distinct American innovations.

Music is one of the things America still makes that the world still wants. The people who make that music should be paid fairly for their work.

That’s our argument.

2.  UK Artist Rights Advocates…

View original post 799 more words

Songwriter/Artist Advocates Reelected to Board Of UK PPL, Turn Back MMF Power Grab

I just realized that we left this story hanging. We are always so busy between Thanksgiving and Dec 28th. Excuse our tardiness.

Crispin Hunt and Mark Kelly beat out Jon Webster a former label exec and president of the UK Music Managers Forum (MMF) for the two performer director positions on the UK public performance licensing authority PPL.  This is very good news.   Crispin Hunt and Mark Kelly have always been  strong advocates for artists and songwriters rights.   Jon Webster and his UK MMF?  Not so much.  In general we thought the whole effort to replace  bona fide songwriter/performers with a manager/label executive from the MMF was just a little to “old boss.”   Smacked a little too much of the old  “don’t worry we really do have your best interests at heart.”    Cause managers and executives never rip off artists right?  I mean it’s usually the other way around? That’s why there are so many music movies where it turns out that the artist has been cheating the manager out of commissions for years!

Congratulations Crispin and Mark!  Forward into 2016!

The Devil’s Greatest Trick: After Canada, Could Google Throw A U.S. Election?

Music Technology Policy

There is an increasing chorus in the press wondering just how much Google could influence elections without any of us knowing it happened.  Sound crazy?  Not so much.  A leading academic has a study demonstrating its entirely possible, and seems particularly possible in tight elections or a voter population that is relatively small compared to the U.S. and highly concentrated–like Canada.  (MTP first reported this story in 2013:  Now That’s What I Call Bundling: Can Google Throw Elections?)

As Professor Robert Epstein writes in a recent Politico story:

Research I have been directing in recent years suggests that Google, Inc., has amassed far more power to control elections—indeed, to control a wide variety of opinions and beliefs—than any company in history has ever had. Google’s search algorithm can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more—up to 80 percent in some…

View original post 1,487 more words

Guest Post: How Spotify Pays (or Doesn’t Pay) Songwriters

Music Technology Policy

[Editor Charlie sez:  MTP’s first post of 2016 is a guest post by Stephen Carlisle, an entertainment lawyer with over 25 years experience in private practice in the State of Florida.  The post first appeared on the Nova Southeastern University Office of Copyright site where Mr. Carlisle is the university’s first Copyright Officer.  Posted with permission of the author.]

Originally posted on December 18, 2015 [before David Lowery’s class action against Spotify]

Two months ago, the Wall Street Journal ran an article reporting that Spotify had failed to pay a significant amount of royalties due to the music publishing company associated with Victory Records. 1 Rather than make nice with Victory Records’ publishing arm, Spotify responded by pulling Victory’s catalog off the music streaming service. 2

This was immediately followed by several articles by David Lowery, (a songwriter for the indie bands Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven)…

View original post 2,187 more words

Five–Make that Six–Gains We Made in 2015: The Good News is the Bad News is Wrong

Music Technology Policy

Despite the singular lack of successful legislation in the U.S. Congress (or much of anywhere else for that matter), the news was not all bad this year.  Not by a long shot.  The good news has a common theme for the most part: Artists, a taste making radio programmer and in one case a publisher breaking away from the pack and standing up for their rights and their human dignity.  For the most part, artists said there’s something bigger than just my rights or my income at stake and we will be silenced no longer.  These were superstars and middle class artists alike, sometimes singly and sometimes in the movement (#irespectmusic), but always with a unique voice.

MIC Coaltion 8-15

Because the legislative route is blocked off by the likes of Google, Pandora and the MIC Coalition, and because the Federal Trade Commission (that shining bureaucracy on a hill and a beacon of…

View original post 1,235 more words

Spotify Hit With $150 Million Class Action Over Unpaid Royalties | Billboard

Vocal artist rights advocate David Lowery brings a massive action against the largest streaming service.

Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker frontman David Lowery, retaining the law firm of Michelman & Robinson, LLP, has filed a class action lawsuit seeking at least $150 million in damages against Spotify, alleging it knowingly, willingly, and unlawfully reproduces and distributes copyrighted compositions without obtaining mechanical licenses.

READ THE FULL STORY AT BILLBOARD:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/6828092/spotify-class-action-royalties-david-lowery-cracker-150-million

#irespectmusic

The Mother of All “Friday News Dumps” Spotify Admits it has an Unpaid Royalty Problem

 

Donna: What’s take out the trash day?
Josh: Friday.
Donna: I mean, what is it?
Josh: Any stories we have to give the press that we’re not wild about, we give all in a lump on Friday.

 

From West Wing episode “Take out the Trash Day.” 

According to Taegan Goddard’s Political Dictionary a “Friday News Dump” is the practice of  “releasing bad news or documents on a Friday afternoon in an attempt to avoid media scrutiny.”  And this is exactly what we are seeing from Spotify this week.   Last night Ed Christman reported in Billboard that Spotify has announced plans to develop a database to “properly manage royalties.”   Properly?  Uh oh!   Technically Billboards editors are going a little soft on Spotify here as the real problem is that Spotify apparently never licensed many of the songs in their catalogue in the first place.  Which implies copyright infringement on a massive scale.

But wait this is not Friday?  Exactly but the week before Christmas is a week of Fridays. And the evening of the 23rd is the mother of all Fridays.  It’s the last day you can get anyone to report on a news story before the holidays. And you get 7-10 days of Saturdays for the story to dissipate.

Got to hand it to Spotify’s new global head of communications & public policy Jonathan Prince.  He is really bringing skills mastered during his time in the Obama/Clinton administrations  to bear on the problem.   This news release wasn’t just a Friday news dump it appears timed with the announcement of a Obama/Biden Spotify playlist (announced on the official White House website, a taxpayer funded government website I might add).  Given that Spotify appears to be illegally hosting a significant amount of unlicensed songs wouldn’t this be the equivalent of  George W appearing on the Enron Christmas card after they admitted to fraud?

Merry Christmas Silicon Valley Billionaires!  And fuck you artists.  – Your friends at Spotify (and The White House.)

 

 

The MTP Interview: David Lowery on the CRB Webcasting Rates

Music Technology Policy

This post is the second of a two part interview with Blake Morgan and David Lowery about the newly announced webcasting rates as determined by the Copyright Royalty Board.

MTP: How do you feel about the CRB decision in general as far as rates go?  

Well it’s a mixed bag.  Leans bad.  The rates went up marginally for Pandora, and that seems to be the lead in the press.  But it looks like rates went down for other webcasters.  You saw Pandora stock popped on the CRB news?   Sometimes markets tell you what no one dares say.  The markets are saying that this is good for webcasters and bad for artists.  Of course you won’t see that in the tech or music business press.  [Billboard posted one story on the wave of negative reactions at press time after David’s interview.]

MTP: Was this more of a…

View original post 712 more words

The Absurd CRB Rates: Wage Stagnation Exposed Kafka Style

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'”

Ronald Reagan

This week we all got a glimpse of what the government thinks we’re all worth compared to Silicon Valley:  Not much.  Run along little artists and be glad that Washington allows you to keep any of the value of your work.

How do we know this?  The Copyright Royalty Board handed down its decision on what music is worth for a variety of the compulsory license rates that benefit Pandora, Clear Channel (iHeart), the National Association of Broadcasters, and other multinational corporate members of the trillion dollar lobbying group known as the MIC Coalition.  The rates  only apply to services that are not “interactive” like Pandora and iHeart most prominently.

The rates were set in some relationship to Pandora’s direct deal with Merlin and iHeart’s deal with Warner Music–that’s the main reason the 2016 rates are so low.  Of course Merlin and Warner Music got other goodies like steering payola that nobody else gets (in fact, we’d be very surprised if any Merlin or Warner artist has any idea what the royalty rate is under either of these deals).

That must be why the CRB asked the Register of Copyright if the CRB could set two different rates, one for the indies that were part of Merlin and who got the non-cash goodies and steering payola and the other for everyone else.  It would be entirely logical that the Merlin and Warner rates would be lower and maybe a lot lower than the rate the CRB set for everyone else (because Merlin and Warner artists will still get paid under the direct steering payola deals but using those rates as a benchmark dragged down everyone else in the world).

Since the Register of Copyrights ruled that two rates are not permitted the CRB had a choice–refer the direct deals with Pandora and iHeart to the FCC for a ruling on whether steering payola is illegal, ignore the direct deals with Merlin and iHeart (which may be illegal contracts based on the steering payola pending a determination by the FCC in the payola waiver petition filed by members of the MIC Coalition) because the rates are not good benchmarks and set their own rates, or pretend that the steering payola rates should be applied to everyone else.  (Note that A2IM, AFM and SAG-AFTRA had a heart attack objecting to indie rates compared to other label rates, with at least A2IM probably knowing all along that this would drag everyone down toward the Merlin rates to which many of their members were parties.)

This is what’s become known as the “Chris Harrison special” (named for the former lawyer for DMX and Pandora, now at SiriusXM, who makes a career out of screwing artists and songwriters).  The trick is that the company does a deal for a low royalty rate plus non-cash goodies with big companies and then shoves the low royalty with NO non-cash goodies on everyone else.  We know he did this.  Billboard reported that he did this and that the same dance could happen with Web IV.  With all the brain power at Merlin and Warner, don’t you think that they could have seen this coming?  They got theirs and left us to fight over the scraps.

It’s actually pretty fair to say that these two deals totally screwed the entire music business.  Thanks Merlin and Warner.  Merry fucking dumbass Christmas to you, too.

We’ll have more to say about this, but let’s talk about the other bunch of fools, the Copyright Royalty Board.  Not only did they buy into the Chris Harrison bullshit, they also added some of their own–they indexed the royalty rate so that it only increases based on what is essentially increases in the rate of inflation applied to the Chris Harrison-era 2016 rate.

FOR FIVE YEARS!

Think about that–what that means is that the 2016 rate essentially stays the same for the full five years of the CRB decision.  This is called “wage stagnation”–a classic case of it in fact.  It’s one thing when wage stagnation happens in the market place.  This isn’t that.  This is government mandated wage stagnation for the benefit of Pandora, Clear Channel/iHeart, Google and the rest of the MIC Coalition.

Maybe the bully boys from Washington thought we should be happy that inflation doesn’t eat into our measly royalty rate?  Did they think there would be dancing in the streets that the government only put their boot on our necks and didn’t cut our guts out, too?

Or maybe they thought we’d be too dumb to notice that they are giving us a flat rate for five years regardless of the value of music.  It’s not implausible to believe that it was their intention to devalue music–at least if you’re not getting the non-cash goodies given to Merlin and Warner.

Here’s the language that applies to royalty rates after 2016 using the CPI (which doesn’t stand for “Create Pandora Income” but you wouldn’t know it):

(c) Annual royalty fee adjustment. The Copyright Royalty Judges shall adjust the royalty fees each year to reflect any changes occurring in the cost of living as determined by the most recent Consumer Price Index (for all consumers and for all items) (CPI-U) published by the Secretary of Labor before December 1 of the preceding year. The adjusted rate shall be rounded to the nearest fourth decimal place. The Judges shall publish notice of the adjusted fees in the Federal Register at least 25 days before January 1. The adjusted fees shall be effective on January 1.

This is just ridiculous.  Let’s leave aside whether the CPI arithmetic mean formula (the “Laspeyres formula”) used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics even makes sense applied to music, let’s leave aside the fact that the entire federal government starting with the Federal Reserve is doing everything humanly possible to keep inflation as low as possible for largely political reasons, and let’s leave aside the fact that the Federal Reserve (and other central banks) has been in lala land with quantitative easing and other indirect forms of printing money to keep the 99% economy from collapsing since 2008.

Let’s also leave aside that the “CPI-U” rate that the CRB chose for us is for urban consumers only and never has included an “expenditure category” for music, entertainment or even “leisure” activities.  (Neither has the producer price index.)  The only connection between CPI-U and artists is what it costs everyone in the economy to live, not to produce music–and will necessarily underweight certain costs to artists like oh, say, GASOLINE.  Everyone uses gasoline, but artists probably use a lot more of it because we have to tour because record sales are in the toilet right next to webcasting rates thanks to the little intellectual elite in a far-away Eastern city.  We use gasoline to produce a product–music–not to drive to work like judges at the CRB.

Out of touch and mean-spirited.

And by the way–indexing everyone’s royalty rate to the CPI-U means that artists who live outside the U.S. will have their U.S. royalty rates pegged to U.S. inflation.  Can we expect to get the same treatment for royalties earned by U.S. artists overseas that SoundExchange collects?

This whole indexing idea is just stupid and it’s insulting.  Not only does it freeze our royalty rates for five years, it also guarantees that any increase in the value of music through the government licenses goes 100% to the services.  It is not shared by the services with featured artists, labels, musicians and vocalists.  The CRB just rewarded what economists call “rent seeking behavior” and what we call being a scumbag.

The geniuses in Washington just told us that they’re going to freeze our royalties and that they think we’re too stupid to know the difference.

Remember–the federal government froze the mechanical royalty rate paid to songwriters at two cents from 1909-1977.  Sixty eight years baby.

Mechanical Rate 1909
Copyright Office Historical Mechanical Rates

If you adjusted for inflation that two cents would be worth over 50¢ today–but it still would have the same buying power as two cents in 1909.  If they did it to the songwriters, they’ll do it to the artists, too.

If we don’t stop the runaway CRB, we may have to live with the consequences for a long time to come.  If you think this is wrong, let the Copyright Office know.  You can write to the Register of Copyrights directly at their public communication page:

http://copyright.gov/help/index.html

half cent
Will Pandora Bring Back the Half Cent Coin?