|
|
Post by jeromemason on Sept 16, 2015 22:42:39 GMT -6
Very complicated stuff, but the complex is what lead us into this in the first place. Very smart people 20 years ago failed to realize the true power of the internet, and that the only thing that was holding the dagger for the music industry was a minimum bandwidth speed of 1mbps in every home. While dial up was still king, it was a much better deal to just go buy the music rather than wait a week to download an album. We've all (well us that stand to make a living off music sales) have just been sitting here watching the money shrink and shrink and bury our heads in our hands with no answers. Is it Apple Music, is it this service, is it that service etc. etc. almost feeling like as though we were watching a nuclear bomb held by a parachute slowly floating towards us and wondering when someone was going to blow the damn thing out of the sky and how were they going to do it. It's a horrible feeling, and I know many on here know what I'm talking about. We want fair trade and we want to go back to making records again so that creativity isn't lost or limited to those who don't care about making money in this business. I've alway been intrigued by the Bitcoin, how they would keep a digital from of currency from being counterfeited. Open source/open platform seems to be the way of the future, collaborators and brilliant minds coming together to create something for the common good. This idea would allow credits back into music, allows current platforms like Apple Music and others to keep doing business as usual but to shore up the rights and royalty distributions. What I really love about this, is the fact it's instant, everyone that would have an account connected to this would receive their royalties immediately on whatever contracts they're listed on. This is technology, this is smart thinking and if they are going to get it figured out this really has some promise, and, this in no way causes any issues for the legitimate distributers. One thing is for certain, people are not just sitting on their asses anymore waiting for the H-Bomb to float down, people are start to shoot at it on their own. Whoever figures this out, is going to be a very very very rich person(s) www.theguardian.com/music/2015/sep/06/imogen-heap-saviour-of-music-industry |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 17, 2015 10:42:55 GMT -6
Great article...hope it works...
“I don’t think it’s that simple,” she says. “It’s not about paying or not paying, it’s how and who gets what. There is plenty of money being made out of the music that we make, but it isn’t getting back to us. It’s about creating a fair trade industry for music, an ecosystem that makes sense. If people knew a radio station, a platform or a device was using a fair system, and that artists were being recompensed for their work directly, they’d go for it over another that didn’t.”
|
|
|
|
Post by b1 on Sept 17, 2015 10:57:53 GMT -6
That is a great article. The internets is opening a door for solutions that everyone would have been locked out of even considering in the past "setup". No reason to consider it previously. Now, it should be a new day with fresh ideas rolling out. As she mentioned, the distributors wouldn't lose their position, it would just be an immediate payout to the rights holder's account. Doesn't everyone else get paid either before or immediately after services are rendered? Why not artists?!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Sept 17, 2015 11:18:39 GMT -6
That is a great article. The internets is opening a door for solutions that everyone would have been locked out of even considering in the past "setup". No reason to consider it previously. Now, it should be a new day with fresh ideas rolling out. As she mentioned, the distributors wouldn't lose their position, it would just be an immediate payout to the rights holder's account. Doesn't everyone else get paid either before or immediately after services are rendered? Why not artists?! No most who sell a product to a distributor or even bought companies are paid at least 30 days out , Governent bodies have rules that the must pay in a certain time frame, but that only kicks in after every part of a order is received . Some very very big Companies won't pay for at least 90 or 120 days again after everything is received and every T is crossed and I dotted! |
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 17, 2015 13:37:38 GMT -6
my impression is there is more cash than ever before, but its in the hands of the wrong people.....
the problem is the leaders today are no longer people with intellect and visions.
they learn at business school some math as well as some accounting.....and thats it.
the problems in our busines are way deeper as the question how we get paid.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 17, 2015 13:39:53 GMT -6
Is this another "big business doesn't care about the little guy" article?
My advice is..
Artists, stop signing contracts that fuck you.
When artists do this, they acknowledge to the music industry that they are OK with the way things are... How about just stop doing that..?
It's as easy as that. Once the music industry loses all it's money due to lack of talent, then they'll either go out of business, or learn that they need to pay artists.
Now, that is truly simple. It's called capitalism. We talk about it a lot in this country but nobody really practices it. We practice corporatism, which just boils down to people giving companies money to take care of things for you so you can be lazy.
Also, if your lawyer (you did get a lawyer to review your contract, didn't you?) says it's cool, but it isn't, then your lawyer is partly at fault, but you're still mostly at fault. Should have researched a better lawyer.
If you signed a contract from a company just to "make it" then you're at fault. Hope is NOT a strategy.
If you didn't read your contract, you're at fault. Caveat emptor.
If you didn't understand your contract, you're at fault. Ignorance is not a defense.
It's really that easy.
Just stop signing music contracts that turn you into slaves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 17, 2015 13:53:20 GMT -6
Nine times out of ten when I've seen an artist get screwed, it was their own manager or lawyer who sold them out to increase the size of an advance they were being paid a quarter of. What's most profitable for labels is a great ongoing relationship with artists.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 17, 2015 16:29:41 GMT -6
svart Exactly what I tell friends .... why giving away master rights if you do not get payed for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 17, 2015 17:18:34 GMT -6
You generally only read about the bad deals. In late 1960 Berry Gordy and Smokey Robinson signed a master lease agreement with Chess Records for the single "Shop Around." As the song climbed the charts, they exercised a buy back clause and launched Motown as a national label.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Sept 17, 2015 17:24:50 GMT -6
svart Exactly what I tell friends .... why giving away master rights if you do not get payed for it. Even if you own your own masters and have a fair deal with a label you STILL can't collect money on sales if the current techology allows everyone to steal music. The article is talking about a way to correct that. |
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Sept 17, 2015 17:26:57 GMT -6
Is this another "big business doesn't care about the little guy" article? No, it's not. It's actually an encouraging article about how musicians may be able to distribute music that is not copyable. It's worth the read. |
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Sept 17, 2015 18:06:38 GMT -6
Whenever I think of "Upper Middle Class Creative Types" I think of Imogen Heap. Before she was ever big, even in previous projects, she always had a lot of nice gear because her parents are moderately wealthy English Southerners. And as well meaning as she is, she always reaks of the hippy optimism that comes with such conditions. She wants fairness, not breadlines. Most musicians just want to quit their job and play full time. But she is well meaning.
She's right that the million service environment isn't conducive. I like the Youtube path - they're just sticking up albums now and you just get the royalties. Anything - Shellac, Mariah Carey, Uncle Tupelo. It's slowly all going to be there. It's a good service. But putting up walls just leads to new solutions. There's money in piracy - so, sorry, but they're going to steal it anyway.
Monetization of streaming is still the big pain. That and of course a big "real talk" on why so much royalty revenue just gets funnelled to the top artists - why is any music in the digital age that is broadcasted going undocumented in the first place? And why does the majority of unclaimed royalties go to the top artists - the majority of stations flouting regulation are local. I know artists who've given up pushing music on local radio because they never get the royalties from it.
We're trying to solve the problems of today, but in truth we still haven't resolved of yesteryear, and there's no industry will to do so either.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Sept 17, 2015 18:28:11 GMT -6
I'm beginning to wonder if anyone actually read the article.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 17, 2015 19:01:41 GMT -6
I did.
|
|
|
|
Post by donr on Sept 17, 2015 19:06:49 GMT -6
I'm beginning to wonder if anyone actually read the article. If I get you, Ipedrum (and jeromemason,) she's advocating a bitcoin type authentication for a music (or anything) file? It's a cool idea. But anything can be re-copied and duplicated in the analog domain, right? (with additonal analog mojo!) And redistributed. I dig Imogene Heap. "Hide And Seek" floors me, even after I understood the lyric. The music is still wonderful. She engineers her stuff too! I take jazznoise's points, about Imogene and about digital distribution. Further thought on the 'bitcoin' model of digital distribution.. Only authenticated copies of the recordings would reflect such. This is how DRM started, but nobody liked it. (me too.) But. There are collectors who value various aspects of rarity, the primacy of any edition of stuff. Why not mark the event of a distribution of copyright content in this non-counterfit format with an authenticated serial number of and _when_ that copy was purchased? And make that copy transferable to another consumer or collector? People could resell and purchase the 8th copy of XYZ's smash single in 2019. There's some virtural value for ya. A non-counterfeitable digital format could easily fly. Make it happen! |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 17, 2015 21:45:01 GMT -6
There is excellent fingerprint technology that can identify streamed recordings or files provided they are in the database.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Sept 17, 2015 22:39:25 GMT -6
There is excellent fingerprint technology that can identify streamed recordings or files provided they are in the database. ur talking ISRC codes right? www.usisrc.org/ |
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 18, 2015 5:46:50 GMT -6
svart Exactly what I tell friends .... why giving away master rights if you do not get payed for it. Even if you own your own masters and have a fair deal with a label you STILL can't collect money on sales if the current techology allows everyone to steal music. The article is talking about a way to correct that. That is what I meant. Another example is - your contract is old and it says you get paid per sold record unit, with streaming you are bum fucked. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 18, 2015 6:42:54 GMT -6
There is excellent fingerprint technology that can identify streamed recordings or files provided they are in the database. ur talking ISRC codes right? www.usisrc.org/No, I'm talking about technology that can identify a specific recording from just a few seconds even when picked up by a microphone from across a room. A consumer version is called Shazam. support.shazam.com/hc/en-us/sections/200676437-Everything-you-need-to-know-and-more-
Replicators use a more sophisticated version to check masters for samples.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 18, 2015 6:48:26 GMT -6
By the way, this is yet another reason Google are scumbags for claiming they can't possibly do anything about entertainment looting. May their stockholders lose every last penny!
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Sept 18, 2015 10:03:59 GMT -6
wow! this is astounding, i didn't even know such IDing software existed, it'd seem to me that the ISRC people would have such software monitoring everything? There is probably a billion $ a year falling through the cracks, it seems this would be a willful negligence to be unaware, or to not employ such a thing? or am I missing something? |
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Sept 18, 2015 15:55:22 GMT -6
For the record I did read but, but I didn't want to comment on the naivety of Buttcoin, lot alone the reapplication for file authentication. As I said, people are cracking iLoks. There is a black market of software, people profit from pirating. Why would this stop them?
As for audio ID software, they're all aware of it. But who does it suit to chase the pennies of every indie musician? Warner - no. Google - no. Royalty Collection Agencies - no.
RCA's serve the big labels, big labels only serve the interests of their big breadwinners when they need to, Google serve Google.
|
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Sept 18, 2015 16:38:39 GMT -6
c'mon guys.. the easy solution is to just require your album's ability to be played back to need an ilok2 license lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 18, 2015 16:46:15 GMT -6
There's no substitute for coffee table grade graphics.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Sept 18, 2015 16:49:47 GMT -6
wow! this is astounding, i didn't even know such IDing software existed, it'd seem to me that the ISRC people would have such software monitoring everything? There is probably a billion $ a year falling through the cracks, it seems this would be a willful negligence to be unaware, or to not employ such a thing? or am I missing something? When my daughter showed me Shazam.. my head near exploded.. I even then sang one of my songs into the iPhone, and it found it.. just sci fi cheers Wiz |
|
