|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jun 22, 2015 8:20:25 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 22, 2015 8:34:48 GMT -6
Wow. Taylor is my hero...and good for Apple.
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Jun 22, 2015 8:48:11 GMT -6
Man good for her. Gotta give her my thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 22, 2015 8:48:53 GMT -6
Btw - that article said 73% would go to the creators...that's the first time I've heard that.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jun 22, 2015 9:12:57 GMT -6
Btw - that article said 73% would go to the creators...that's the first time I've heard that. it said 73% would go to OWNERS, not creators.... I wonder how much goes to the creators? It is nice to see Taylor sticking up for the talented people who made her career possible. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 22, 2015 9:21:45 GMT -6
I imagine that's whoever owns the publishing. It would depend on your deal with the publisher or if you own your on publishing. But here's a question. Are these mechanical or performance royalties?
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 22, 2015 9:36:25 GMT -6
Awesome on both counts. I'm not a swift fan, but boy, she really has the balls to hang it out with the big guns. More power to her. And apple's reply is a little sheepish, but still, the right thing to do. Kudo's to them as well for at least trying to correct a bad mistake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jun 22, 2015 10:33:48 GMT -6
I'm sorry, Apple has never been "on the side of artists." Encouraging music looting is what bailed them out when Jobs it over again and launched the iPod. It's a company totally built on stealing others' intellectual property as was Microsoft. They even lifted their name from the Beatles. They finally settled with an agreement to never sell music and then totally ignored it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Jun 22, 2015 12:07:06 GMT -6
I'm sorry, Apple has never been "on the side of artists." Encouraging music looting is what bailed them out when Jobs it over again and launched the iPod. It's a company totally built on stealing others' intellectual property as was Microsoft. They even lifted their name from the Beatles. They finally settled with an agreement to never sell music and then totally ignored it. there was a Tv movie in the 90's called "the PIRATES of siliCON valley", about Apple/microsoft, proof that you can judge a book(movie) by it's cover? haha. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jun 22, 2015 13:51:10 GMT -6
I was in the neighborhood and met Jobs when he was selling blue boxes on the Berkeley campus. I was pretty freaked out when I figured out what they were up to with regard to music. My wife was actually in the room when Bill Gates assured folks from Sony and Philips that the CD-ROM they were asking for posed no threat to the music industry. Anyway, my point is that these folks are not our friends by any stretch of the imagination.
|
|
|
|
Post by b1 on Jun 22, 2015 14:19:44 GMT -6
I was in the neighborhood and met Jobs when he was selling blue boxes on the Berkeley campus. I was pretty freaked out when I figured out what they were up to with regard to music. My wife was actually in the room when Bill Gates assured folks from Sony and Philips that the CD-ROM they were asking for posed no threat to the music industry. Anyway, my point is that these folks are not our friends by any stretch of the imagination. I don't know, "folks" sounds like a "humanistic" term. These are a pariah of society, by their own self discipline. IMO, content creators need a coalition separate from the big wig money/rights sucks. There are more of us than of them. Who will get the ball rolling? It seems that is the only recourse to break the current paradigm. |
|
|
|
Post by category5 on Jun 22, 2015 16:39:27 GMT -6
I wouldn't go that far Bob. Apple is pretty much responsible for turning file sharing into the MP3 business. Believe me, if that hadn't happened then the music business very well could have disintegrated. As technology changes consumption the industry has to change and adapt or it will ultimately fail. It happened with cassettes, and again with MP3. The CD and iTunes were the answers to those problems, respectively.
Now streaming plans pose a threat to the model of selling music the industry is reliant upon. I hope Apple crushes spotify in short time and fixes things again. The no pay during trial period bull shit was a mistake that never should have happened, but at least they are owning up to it and making good.
As for how much goes to the publisher vs the artist, etc., that's up to the artist's management when the deal is put on paper. Can't blame Apple or even Spotify for a bad contract.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Jun 22, 2015 17:05:23 GMT -6
What's really pissing me off about this is that the mainstream press is pretty much accepting the fact that the new world for music is that for some billion dollar corporation Streaming is by subscription is the new profit model but for the artist it's going to be simply a publicity machine and no money the arist need s to relie on touring and merchandising as a revenue stream.
OK but you better not expect that free PR piece to exhibit the production standards and overall musicianship that you have come to know as standard for the radio because the Artists non profit venture can't pay for the Producer Engineer and Studio Players if it can't generate some direct revenue!
More and more I see the new tech age as simply a reimagined redistribution of wealth based on some idiot figuring out a way of using a computer to either screw or steal from those who have worked their collective asses off and then telling the world if we are against there new scheme that we simply don't understand hi tech !
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 22, 2015 17:33:57 GMT -6
I'm not usually one to look at the glass half full, but maybe the results of streaming cutting out big budgets will put the emphasis on talented engineers and producers that can still deliver a great product despite all the hindrances.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jun 22, 2015 19:41:46 GMT -6
The problem is the investment banksters who have been getting rich from people investing in the perceived value of these companies. It's really a house of cards.
|
|
|
|
Post by yotonic on Jun 22, 2015 19:43:13 GMT -6
Jun 22, 2015 19:33:57 GMT -4 Johnkenn said:
I'm not usually one to look at the glass half full, but maybe the results of streaming cutting out big budgets will put the emphasis on talented engineers and producers that can still deliver a great product despite all the hindrances.
We are already there. These great producers like Dave Cobb are working out of their houses and can only make a decent living because they are talented enough and hard working enough to do the work of what used to take seven people in the old model. There is no room anymore except for the most talented and if you look at who is still hanging on, they are doing more for less and competing to get what is out there. You want Charlie Peacock? Pick up the phone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 22, 2015 20:55:13 GMT -6
The problem is the investment banksters who have been getting rich from people investing in the perceived value of these companies. It's really a house of cards. Kind've like the housing collapse. Fanny and Freddy reselling worthless commodities. |
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Jun 23, 2015 4:22:46 GMT -6
There is no room anymore except for the most talented and if you look at who is still hanging on, they are doing more for less and competing to get what is out there. Pretty much the same in every industry. Or should I say every service industry? It's been especially hard on Tradesmen. Maybe it's more accurate to say...."there is no room anymore for the most talented" ? Sheeple don't think about what "value" means anymore. They are only interested in the lowest bottom line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 23, 2015 9:46:55 GMT -6
Probably more of a reflection on the economy. I'm sure there will be times in the future when the economy takes an upswing and then people will be more willing not to settle for the cheapest and quickest anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jun 23, 2015 10:15:59 GMT -6
Pretty interesting take from Gregory at Kush Audio. cj1973 had also posted similar thoughts on Facebook too. Seems totally plausible... |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 23, 2015 10:47:46 GMT -6
I just believe the the simplest answer is usually the right one...it would have to be a huge conspiracy and if it ever got out, it wouldn't have been worth it. So, I guess I'm not that jaded. Swift is the most popular performer in the world. Apple knew there could be a domino effect. The relented not because of a single artist, but because of what it could have meant for their bottom line. It was a smart business move.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 23, 2015 10:48:36 GMT -6
And btw - I read the TS Photog contract...what's wron with Taylor Swift wanting to retain the right to her own image?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107
|
Post by ericn on Jun 23, 2015 11:07:19 GMT -6
I do believe this letter is from Taylor Swift, well that is Taylor Swift the buissness, nothing wrong with that, they have as much interest in this as any of us. they need to pay rent and eat to.
Anybody besides me waiting to see if Apple follows Micheal Jacksons and Sonys lead and starts buying up publishing with all their cash?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 23, 2015 11:08:30 GMT -6
I'd sure as hell sell my catalog...
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 23, 2015 11:19:50 GMT -6
I like conspiracy's as much as the next guy, but I tend to agree with John. I don't think it was pre-meditated and in collusion. I'm sure Apple had weighed both options, chose the cheap one, and realized they were about to get reamed, so quickly opted for the other. Either way, I think it's a positive step. But it takes more than one step to go on a walk.... Hopefully things will shape up for content creators.
On a slightly side note re: paid out royalties.,,,,,, I talked with a publisher acquaintance yesterday. He said that for TV vocal placements, BMI is paying out 34% more than ASCAP, and that SESAC is paying out 8X's (!!!!!) more than ASCAP. Wow, And more on topic with this thread....he mentioned that STREAMING - i.e.: Netflix and Hulu mostly - are only paying out about 4% of Cable TV, while increasing every quarter with their viewership. That is discouraging, because I believe that they have more than 4% of the market at this point. I have been hoping for more progress on that front, but progress seems very slow on the PAYMENT side, while the business side is moving at the speed of light. I hope we're not in for even worse times ahead..... <fingers crossed>
Congress has got to get their heads wrapped around streaming before it's too late to pull things back in to perspective.
|
|
