|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 11, 2018 14:38:48 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 11, 2018 14:47:00 GMT -6
It's a start. My fear is that the people (government and ordinary folks) will see it as leveling the playing field, and delivering more than enough to musicians / songwriters. For good.
IMO, it's not enough. Not even close. But it's a start. Now is the time to push hard when the tide is moving our direction.....
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 11, 2018 16:09:59 GMT -6
It's a start. My fear is that the people (government and ordinary folks) will see it as leveling the playing field, and delivering more than enough to musicians / songwriters. For good. IMO, it's not enough. Not even close. But it's a start. Now is the time to push hard when the tide is moving our direction..... That very sentiment was mentioned in the press conference and I agree. It is a start. Better than we've had in years and at least it's been mentioned now in front of the world. With all the President has on his plate at the moment, I think it's notable that he took the time to recognize the bill with a press conference. I guess we can stay tuned to see if more comes of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 11, 2018 17:50:36 GMT -6
Yeah it’s a start. Would have been devastating if it hadn’t passed. But the streamers are just one of 500 demons creators have to battle. For instance, I had two big songs a decade ago when I was with ASCAP. My co-writer on both was BMI. So, she shared her statements with me. After about a year and a half, I was down $65k compared to her earnings. This was a big problem at the time and ASCAP made it right - as they should have. But because of that, I resigned and became a BMI member. Of course, I couldn’t move any money-making songs to BMI, so ASCAP has continued to pay on those two songs. Ever since then ASCAP has paid a fraction of what my BMI co-writer makes. Like now, I make 1/20th of what she makes...and I have no recourse. You can’t sue because they claim the money they’re not paying me is a “bonus” for members that stay. Even though that’s against their bylaws. But at least I’m not the only one. Shane McAnally is the biggest writer in town - and he left for GMR - and claims ASCAP has shorted him over $1.8 million. Could you even imagine?
The lesson here is “pick your local mobster early and stick with him...”
|
|
|
|
Post by jtc111 on Oct 11, 2018 18:10:30 GMT -6
On another forum where I also participate, the topic of royalties comes up fairly frequently. I'm always amazed at how many fellow musicians take the position that songwriters shouldn't get paid when their music is used by others. It's usually the same people who play gigs for free. I guess if they put no value on their own work, they don't see the value in other peoples' intellectual property.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 11, 2018 18:11:12 GMT -6
GMR?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 11, 2018 18:25:32 GMT -6
Global Music Rights. Irving Azoff’s PRO. |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Oct 11, 2018 22:30:49 GMT -6
Yeah it’s a start. Would have been devastating if it hadn’t passed. But the streamers are just one of 500 demons creators have to battle. For instance, I had two big songs a decade ago when I was with ASCAP. My co-writer on both was BMI. So, she shared her statements with me. After about a year and a half, I was down $65k compared to her earnings. This was a big problem at the time and ASCAP made it right - as they should have. But because of that, I resigned and became a BMI member. Of course, I couldn’t move any money-making songs to BMI, so ASCAP has continued to pay on those two songs. Ever since then ASCAP has paid a fraction of what my BMI co-writer makes. Like now, I make 1/20th of what she makes...and I have no recourse. You can’t sue because they claim the money they’re not paying me is a “bonus” for members that stay. Even though that’s against their bylaws. But at least I’m not the only one. Shane McAnally is the biggest writer in town - and he left for GMR - and claims ASCAP has shorted him over $1.8 million. Could you even imagine? The lesson here is “pick your local mobster early and stick with him...” Geez John, I've been ASCAP my whole life. What have I missed out on? |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Oct 11, 2018 22:37:22 GMT -6
Good this got done because politicians must have this as low priority on their todo lists. The last time stat rates for what used to be "airplay" but now is all there is, were raised, was decades ago, and that was overdue then. I just remember that finally it did get done, like this. >President Trump signed the eagerly anticipated Music Modernization Act into law at a ceremony at the White House on Thursday, in the most high-profile event for the music industry in several years. Mike Love and Kid Rock, two of Trump’s most visible supporters in the music community, were at the White House for the signing alongside Sam Moore of Sam & Dave, country singer John Rich and the Doobie Brothers’ Jeff “Skunk” Baxter. Intended to update music copyright law for the digital era, H.R. 1551 (formally the “Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act”) accomplishes three key things: making sure songwriters and artists receive royalties on songs recorded before 1972; allocating royalties for music producers; and updating licensing and royalty rules for streaming services to pay rights-holders in a more streamlined fashion, via a new, independent entity. Under the act, many music creators will have a more reliable way of collecting the money that they’re due. ...< |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 12, 2018 6:50:32 GMT -6
On another forum where I also participate, the topic of royalties comes up fairly frequently. I'm always amazed at how many fellow musicians take the position that songwriters shouldn't get paid when their music is used by others. It's usually the same people who play gigs for free. I guess if they put no value on their own work, they don't see the value in other peoples' intellectual property. I think this is closer to the reality of this whole thing, than anything else. Unknown bands/artists have always gambled on "free" products and performances in return for "exposure". There has always been someone handing out tapes, CD's or download links, while hoping and praying to get those into the "right" hands in order to make it big. Their desires and aspirations have always been on "making it big" and the most romanticized version of this is the architypical story of being discovered out of nowhere by the songs ending up being heard by some bigwig after giving out enough tapes/CD's/links. The overwhelming majority of songs/bands on these streaming sites are unknowns who've flooded the market and normalized "free" by signing up and agreeing to essentially let their stuff be "free" in exchange for simplicity and the slim chance of being "discovered". The terms of royalties and payments have always been there for anyone to read. Everyone who's put songs up for streaming/hosting has had to click "OK" to agree to these things.. They could have just said "you know, this is a bad deal and I'm not OK with this" and they would have a clear conscious. If enough people said the same things, then this industry would have never had the issues with essentially-free streaming. But people still clicked "OK" because everyone still wants their stuff out there, just-in-case a single person picks them out of millions to be the next big thing. However, nobody ever considers that millions of others have done the same things, and now they are just a single voice in a sea of voices, a much higher noise floor if you will, with no better chances of exposure due to the sheer number of choices out there.. And they never considered that they have normalized "free" for all. Everyone wants to blame the streaming companies, but the truth is that it's the artists that caused this. They wanted fame and fortune, and they made deals with the devil to try to tip the odds in their favor. The companies just gave them what they wanted, exposure. Instead of standing on the street corner giving away free CD's, they now sit at their keyboards uploading free songs. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 12, 2018 7:38:09 GMT -6
Yeah it’s a start. Would have been devastating if it hadn’t passed. But the streamers are just one of 500 demons creators have to battle. For instance, I had two big songs a decade ago when I was with ASCAP. My co-writer on both was BMI. So, she shared her statements with me. After about a year and a half, I was down $65k compared to her earnings. This was a big problem at the time and ASCAP made it right - as they should have. But because of that, I resigned and became a BMI member. Of course, I couldn’t move any money-making songs to BMI, so ASCAP has continued to pay on those two songs. Ever since then ASCAP has paid a fraction of what my BMI co-writer makes. Like now, I make 1/20th of what she makes...and I have no recourse. You can’t sue because they claim the money they’re not paying me is a “bonus” for members that stay. Even though that’s against their bylaws. But at least I’m not the only one. Shane McAnally is the biggest writer in town - and he left for GMR - and claims ASCAP has shorted him over $1.8 million. Could you even imagine? The lesson here is “pick your local mobster early and stick with him...” Geez John, I've been ASCAP my whole life. What have I missed out on? I seriously doubt anything. At that time in Nashville, there was a huge exodus to BMI because ASCAP wasn’t paying as much. They claimed that BMI was “front loading”...that they were paying more for current songs at the expense of older ones...but here I sit with nothing to show 13 years later and my BMI co-writer still making dramatically more. If the Shane McAnally article (I’ll link it) is evidence, then I’m missing out on “bonuses” that they give members that don’t leave...well if that’s the case, allow me to take my songs with me for goodness sakes. The truth of the matter is, the bigger the song and catalog, the more you get paid. They make a deal with radio - what - every 5-10 years? I think the last deal with ascap was for like $2 billion. So there’s a finite amount of money to be distributed. Their better performers and moneymakers are going to be taken care of. My situation unfortunately was kind of a perfect storm. I was that far down after like two years and I didn’t want to have to go through the fight I went through again to get paid what I felt like the song had earned. I knew there was a chance I would get underpaid from that point, but I bet on my future and thought, “I’ll just put my nose to the grindstone and make money from the hits that are to come...” and then they never came. And then rap music married into country...and then there were no mechanical sales...and then there were no publishing deals...and then you look up and wonder what job you can get with a 20 year blank space on your resume. Sorry, not trying to be Eyeore, but it feels pretty bleak these days. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 12, 2018 7:42:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 12, 2018 11:15:36 GMT -6
On another forum where I also participate, the topic of royalties comes up fairly frequently. I'm always amazed at how many fellow musicians take the position that songwriters shouldn't get paid when their music is used by others. It's usually the same people who play gigs for free. I guess if they put no value on their own work, they don't see the value in other peoples' intellectual property. I think this is closer to the reality of this whole thing, than anything else. Unknown bands/artists have always gambled on "free" products and performances in return for "exposure". There has always been someone handing out tapes, CD's or download links, while hoping and praying to get those into the "right" hands in order to make it big. Their desires and aspirations have always been on "making it big" and the most romanticized version of this is the architypical story of being discovered out of nowhere by the songs ending up being heard by some bigwig after giving out enough tapes/CD's/links. The overwhelming majority of songs/bands on these streaming sites are unknowns who've flooded the market and normalized "free" by signing up and agreeing to essentially let their stuff be "free" in exchange for simplicity and the slim chance of being "discovered". The terms of royalties and payments have always been there for anyone to read. Everyone who's put songs up for streaming/hosting has had to click "OK" to agree to these things.. They could have just said "you know, this is a bad deal and I'm not OK with this" and they would have a clear conscious. If enough people said the same things, then this industry would have never had the issues with essentially-free streaming. But people still clicked "OK" because everyone still wants their stuff out there, just-in-case a single person picks them out of millions to be the next big thing. However, nobody ever considers that millions of others have done the same things, and now they are just a single voice in a sea of voices, a much higher noise floor if you will, with no better chances of exposure due to the sheer number of choices out there.. And they never considered that they have normalized "free" for all. Everyone wants to blame the streaming companies, but the truth is that it's the artists that caused this. They wanted fame and fortune, and they made deals with the devil to try to tip the odds in their favor. The companies just gave them what they wanted, exposure. Instead of standing on the street corner giving away free CD's, they now sit at their keyboards uploading free songs. Isn't that just a little bit heart wrenching though? All these teeming masses of struggling musicians just putting out their shingle hoping for anything to come their way? I do think the people with the money and the influence are the ones to target to make changes, kind of obviously. It's probably not going to affect DIY musicians anyway. Seems more significant to people actually getting paychecks. People who have already "made it" in some way. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 12, 2018 11:27:28 GMT -6
Also speaking for myself I don't really know if I want my music on streaming services.
If things "get better" I might be more willing to put my releases on those kinds of sites.
I just don't feel good about them at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 12, 2018 13:18:44 GMT -6
On another forum where I also participate, the topic of royalties comes up fairly frequently. I'm always amazed at how many fellow musicians take the position that songwriters shouldn't get paid when their music is used by others. It's usually the same people who play gigs for free. I guess if they put no value on their own work, they don't see the value in other peoples' intellectual property. I think this is closer to the reality of this whole thing, than anything else. Unknown bands/artists have always gambled on "free" products and performances in return for "exposure". There has always been someone handing out tapes, CD's or download links, while hoping and praying to get those into the "right" hands in order to make it big. Their desires and aspirations have always been on "making it big" and the most romanticized version of this is the architypical story of being discovered out of nowhere by the songs ending up being heard by some bigwig after giving out enough tapes/CD's/links. The overwhelming majority of songs/bands on these streaming sites are unknowns who've flooded the market and normalized "free" by signing up and agreeing to essentially let their stuff be "free" in exchange for simplicity and the slim chance of being "discovered". The terms of royalties and payments have always been there for anyone to read. Everyone who's put songs up for streaming/hosting has had to click "OK" to agree to these things.. They could have just said "you know, this is a bad deal and I'm not OK with this" and they would have a clear conscious. If enough people said the same things, then this industry would have never had the issues with essentially-free streaming. But people still clicked "OK" because everyone still wants their stuff out there, just-in-case a single person picks them out of millions to be the next big thing. However, nobody ever considers that millions of others have done the same things, and now they are just a single voice in a sea of voices, a much higher noise floor if you will, with no better chances of exposure due to the sheer number of choices out there.. And they never considered that they have normalized "free" for all. Everyone wants to blame the streaming companies, but the truth is that it's the artists that caused this. They wanted fame and fortune, and they made deals with the devil to try to tip the odds in their favor. The companies just gave them what they wanted, exposure. Instead of standing on the street corner giving away free CD's, they now sit at their keyboards uploading free songs. I always figure that if you make somebody pay for something they're more likely to listen to it. I know I have a pile of freebie disks I've never listened to. The only things I give away are legit promos.
My first CD sold enough to pay for mastering on the second, with a bit left over for other expenses - and that was just sales out of my shoulder bag. Online sales are pretty worthless if you don't have either PR or an established name.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 12, 2018 13:28:56 GMT -6
I think this is closer to the reality of this whole thing, than anything else. Unknown bands/artists have always gambled on "free" products and performances in return for "exposure". There has always been someone handing out tapes, CD's or download links, while hoping and praying to get those into the "right" hands in order to make it big. Their desires and aspirations have always been on "making it big" and the most romanticized version of this is the architypical story of being discovered out of nowhere by the songs ending up being heard by some bigwig after giving out enough tapes/CD's/links. The overwhelming majority of songs/bands on these streaming sites are unknowns who've flooded the market and normalized "free" by signing up and agreeing to essentially let their stuff be "free" in exchange for simplicity and the slim chance of being "discovered". The terms of royalties and payments have always been there for anyone to read. Everyone who's put songs up for streaming/hosting has had to click "OK" to agree to these things.. They could have just said "you know, this is a bad deal and I'm not OK with this" and they would have a clear conscious. If enough people said the same things, then this industry would have never had the issues with essentially-free streaming. But people still clicked "OK" because everyone still wants their stuff out there, just-in-case a single person picks them out of millions to be the next big thing. However, nobody ever considers that millions of others have done the same things, and now they are just a single voice in a sea of voices, a much higher noise floor if you will, with no better chances of exposure due to the sheer number of choices out there.. And they never considered that they have normalized "free" for all. Everyone wants to blame the streaming companies, but the truth is that it's the artists that caused this. They wanted fame and fortune, and they made deals with the devil to try to tip the odds in their favor. The companies just gave them what they wanted, exposure. Instead of standing on the street corner giving away free CD's, they now sit at their keyboards uploading free songs. I always figure that if you make somebody pay for something they're more likely to listen to it. I know I have a pile of freebie disks I've never listened to. The only things I give away are legit promos.
My first CD sold enough to pay for mastering on the second, with a bit left over for other expenses - and that was just sales out of my shoulder bag. Online sales are pretty worthless if you don't have either PR or an established name.
Most of the unknown bands I know who are a part in this rat-race of free streaming put up a lot of "free" content and do very little self promoting otherwise, then complain that it's not going anywhere. I think the belief is that they've done so much to get to that point, that they're looking for the satisfaction of it "blowing up" (kiddo lingo these days) and it never does.. because nobody knew about it. Yet I know a few bands who've gotten a lot of press and attention because they spend more time promoting themselves and engaging their fans than they do writing new music. Different mentalities I suppose. One is that hard work should/will be rewarded and large amounts of content are what drive this.. The other is that content is only a small part and promotion needs to be done actively and continually. I'm pretty sure the second one is the winner, but seems to be the less popular way to go in today's instant-gratification world. |
|
|
|
Post by jtc111 on Oct 12, 2018 14:04:50 GMT -6
My first CD sold enough to pay for mastering on the second, with a bit left over for other expenses - and that was just sales out of my shoulder bag. Online sales are pretty worthless if you don't have either PR or an established name.
I'm pretty sure most people that make a cd don't get into the black these days, so congrats to you and to anyone else that manages to pull that off. For me it was mostly just luck that made it happen. Somehow my cd wound up in the hands of someone who does television cues. I have no idea who is using it or how they found it. I just know that about 8 years back I got a check from BMI and I've received a deposit into my bank account every quarter since. To date my music has been on 34 different shows. Totally unexpected but I'll take it gladly. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Oct 12, 2018 14:21:12 GMT -6
[...] My situation unfortunately was kind of a perfect storm. I was that far down after like two years and I didn’t want to have to go through the fight I went through again to get paid what I felt like the song had earned. I knew there was a chance I would get underpaid from that point, but I bet on my future and thought, “I’ll just put my nose to the grindstone and make money from the hits that are to come...” and then they never came. And then rap music married into country...and then there were no mechanical sales...and then there were no publishing deals...and then you look up and wonder what job you can get with a 20 year blank space on your resume. Sorry, not trying to be Eyeore, but it feels pretty bleak these days. Wow, this is so poignant, Johnkenn. Thanks for sharing your struggle. These are strange and tough times in this business. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 12, 2018 15:03:26 GMT -6
I think this is closer to the reality of this whole thing, than anything else. Unknown bands/artists have always gambled on "free" products and performances in return for "exposure". There has always been someone handing out tapes, CD's or download links, while hoping and praying to get those into the "right" hands in order to make it big. Their desires and aspirations have always been on "making it big" and the most romanticized version of this is the architypical story of being discovered out of nowhere by the songs ending up being heard by some bigwig after giving out enough tapes/CD's/links. The overwhelming majority of songs/bands on these streaming sites are unknowns who've flooded the market and normalized "free" by signing up and agreeing to essentially let their stuff be "free" in exchange for simplicity and the slim chance of being "discovered". The terms of royalties and payments have always been there for anyone to read. Everyone who's put songs up for streaming/hosting has had to click "OK" to agree to these things.. They could have just said "you know, this is a bad deal and I'm not OK with this" and they would have a clear conscious. If enough people said the same things, then this industry would have never had the issues with essentially-free streaming. But people still clicked "OK" because everyone still wants their stuff out there, just-in-case a single person picks them out of millions to be the next big thing. However, nobody ever considers that millions of others have done the same things, and now they are just a single voice in a sea of voices, a much higher noise floor if you will, with no better chances of exposure due to the sheer number of choices out there.. And they never considered that they have normalized "free" for all. Everyone wants to blame the streaming companies, but the truth is that it's the artists that caused this. They wanted fame and fortune, and they made deals with the devil to try to tip the odds in their favor. The companies just gave them what they wanted, exposure. Instead of standing on the street corner giving away free CD's, they now sit at their keyboards uploading free songs. I always figure that if you make somebody pay for something they're more likely to listen to it. I know I have a pile of freebie disks I've never listened to. The only things I give away are legit promos.
My first CD sold enough to pay for mastering on the second, with a bit left over for other expenses - and that was just sales out of my shoulder bag. Online sales are pretty worthless if you don't have either PR or an established name.
You're giving your stuff away on the streaming sites though. You're on Google, Spotify, Youtube, etc. I'm streaming your album as we speak...  |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 12, 2018 21:17:28 GMT -6
I always figure that if you make somebody pay for something they're more likely to listen to it. I know I have a pile of freebie disks I've never listened to. The only things I give away are legit promos.
My first CD sold enough to pay for mastering on the second, with a bit left over for other expenses - and that was just sales out of my shoulder bag. Online sales are pretty worthless if you don't have either PR or an established name.
You're giving your stuff away on the streaming sites though. You're on Google, Spotify, Youtube, etc. I'm streaming your album as we speak... How amazingly nice! The aggregators are kinda doing their job! Maybe I'll get a liittle monopoly money!
Just FYI, I didn't really give it to most of the aggregators until it had been out for a couple or three years - tha record is WAY out of date and isn't anything really resembling the current band - or the last band, which did the record I'm trying to get out now (it's about two years old at this point.) (frankly, I'm a bit embarrased with it - I hadn't really mastered my voice yet and ther studio wasn't totally together) ( I kinda wish somebody had been shooting video - THAT might have been interesting in a trainwreck sort of way. No, not the amplifiers....)
Does anybody know anyone who can help on cover design so I can actually get #2 out? My hand is not steady enough on the mouse now to do the necessary Photoshop work, basic as it may be. I have a little money for the work, not as much as I'd like.
However, if somebody listens on a streaming service, at least they've listened once, unlike giving away free CDs that probably just get binned (or in my case, chucked in the box of free CDs - I rarely throw things away.)
|
|
