Advocacy groups representing songwriters, composers, and music publishers are hoping to carve a bigger piece of the download pie for themselves by re-classifying some electronic uses for their work as "public performances." They even advocate being paid when you click the "preview" button in iTunes.
A "public performance fee" is usually paid when a song is performed to a live audience, included in a movie you watch at a theater, or broadcast in some way. So songwriters and publishers are not getting performance fees for music that plays in the background of movies and TV shows, music streamed via internet radio and the 30-second song previews that iTunes and other music sites feature. They don't like this at all. It's not that they don't get paid at all, though. They're paid "sync rights" and "mechanical rights." But these fees aren't enough.
The songwriters and publishers are lobbying Congress to pass legislation that says downloads involve performance rights, in spite of the fact that they don't... at least in my opinion. But whether or not I'm right, it seems that the laws covering rights for music need a serious overhaul in the digital age.
As far as what it means to you, the consumer, probably very little. I guess if the law does change, iTunes might stop offering previews of songs, but I don't think it's likely to happen. Anyway, I'll bet you just steal music from Bit-Torrent anyway, don't you? Criminal!
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 1–17 of 17
manusferrera
itunes should just start running ads along their borders or something so they can keep their songs down to .99 cents because with all this stuff its just a matter of time before songs are 1.50 and 2.00.
DVirus008
wut i dnt get about all this is that song writers are asking for a "preformance fee" for previewed songs..... so the next time i play a metallica or korn song for a freind theyre gna bust down my door and force me to pay a fee? i understand that that were in a recession still but damn! seriously i dnt think people especailly celebrities and "artists" have no shame anymore. youre getting your damn money people, youre getting paid, shut up!!
JimOfTroy
I'm one of the people out there that actually pays for my music and buys through iTunes and Amazon because I do believe that the artists should earn something for their work, but if I have to pay $0.99 for a song I've never heard I'll go download it free somewhere instead. It's that simple.
N8R
Punkrockkyle pointed out a large portion of what I've been saying for over 10 years. There is DEFINITELY more money in self promotion nowadays and if the labels want to stay in the loop... they better recognize.
I always wondered how iTunes got around that. There are already laws in place (something about 8 seconds I believe) I just figured it was in the terms for uploading tracks on iTunes. Either way, publishing rights are the subject at hand... that's where the money is. The artists usually forfeit over HALF of the publishing rights with most recording contracts. So the artists themselves aren't necessarily to blame for this.
The best thing you can do to support a band is go to a show, and for the extra support... buy a shirt. PLEASE support local music.
InHumanMarine
The artists being represented are probably the band members of Metallica. yeah this thing will never pass and if does you'll easily a drop in sales esp. since the consumer will always take the hit.
CannibalShogun
@punkrockkyle
you've pointed out that the problem with artists making money from record sales is the label. so is the label going to pay this added fee? no. is the distributer going to pay this fee? no. they are going to pass it along to the consumer which for you, the artist just equals less exposure and less sales.
for the last few years i've been a recording engineer, show promoter and been heavily involved in music marketing and I can safely say that these days the only way to make any money is to give something away for free. If you don't like the system (which you shouldn't) quit it and do it yourself, cover your costs on your own, print your record and t-shirts on your own and guess what, all the money that comes in is yours. charging money (no matter who pays it) for a "preview" (which by definition should be free) is just going to hurt the industry further.
CannibalShogun
are these people idiots?! how do they expect to sell music if one can't preview it? "Please let me pay money to hear this preview to see if I want to pay money for this song."
I guess they must realize that they suck and maybe people would be more likely to buy their songs if they haven't heard them before.
slvchris
Music sux now anyway. If I need something I will just get it from the local used cd store. I will not pay useless record companies for music. FU RIAA
klix333
The Fair Use policy should stomp this out.
FuzzyHammer
As a music business major and a song writer, I have to say that this lobby is pretty lame.
Also, it's not going to happen, period.
A while back they tried to lobby for a higher royalty for songs, from the 9.1 cents they get now, to 12 cents, which I thought was fair and over due, but iTunes said, "iTunes is only in business to make money, and if we have to pay each songwriter 2.9 cents more per song, then we will shut down iTunes altogether and go home." They literally said that. And nobody called their bluff because they're the largest online distributor of music... so they'll probably say the same thing and the push for "pay per PRE view" will fail.
punkrockkyle
being a musician myself. i found it hard to deal with the amount of money artists make from record sales through a label, (on average $0.07 per sale). Even through iTunes that is the extent of what they make, because sadly it's a pain in the ass to get distributed properly on iTunes, so the label is the reason they got on in the first place.
traditionally bands are supposed to try and gobble up as much money that is fronted to them to record the album when they sign. however, not many people outside the industry know that the money they receive for payment is expected to be used to cover the costs of recording, and counts against whatever money is expected to be recouped from record sales before they even start getting checks from the label.
the reason artists want the performance rights to be paid for is because even though they sign over the rights to the actual recording, they still own the copyright of the actual arrangement of the song, (unless they've signed it to a publisher) so they have an opportunity to actually make some money for their hard work being used in means they had never intended it to be used for (tv, movies, commercials, unlimited previews.)
the point im trying to get across is, bands make little to nothing from signing to a label and getting their work on iTunes, or amazon for that matter. they only make money from buying up a stock of their own records, and selling them, and tee shirts on tour.
while i find the argument amusing against artists being paid, or that previews potentially go away. it's wholly laughable to believe that many if any of the people that frequent the g4 site are purchasing their music.
even though it's a lesser of two evils, paying artists for their work being previewed isn't a bad idea, because it keeps them entertaining people. (yes, i do realize that the world would be a better place without kanye west, and several other mainstream artists.) but if these people go, then the others that pick up the slack will want the same. programmers wouldn't want a preview of the coding for their newest game to go out and not get paid for it.
djboogymonster
Hey, artist and songwriters,
If you make good music, we'll pay for it! Quit trying to nickel and dime your way to stardom. With music being more and more accessible wouldn't you want it to be as easy as possible for me to be introduced to your music?
Funny that its only the bands/execs who are already making tons of money that seem to have issues. The average garage band is just happy to have their music ON itunes.
Wozman23
I think The Feed writers should jump in on this. You guys are writing and these articles are somewhat of a performance. Hell, I'm writing and performing right now, its not rocket science. Everybody that reads this should Paypal $1 to Wozman23@aol.com.
The business model does need a huge overhaul. At least its the songwriters who want more. They actually effect the music itself, but I'm sure they are very underpaid compared to the labels execs. I say keep the system just as it is today, but take the money from the suits who have ruined the industry in the 1st place.
Kanaye
This is pure greed from the music industry - if we don't get enough money from one sector, get from the other...if anyone haves the power to stop this madness, make it stop! Soon they will make US, the consumer, pay for just singing along to our favorite songs!
Hrolf
I dont buy music anymore. most of it its complete garbage. having pandora on my Pre, and SAT. radio in my truck makes downloading,buying, stealing, whatever pointless.
Shockwave562
this is pathetic, getting paid for preview clicks? write me another sad song artists cause I just don't care about your money problems.
if your music is good when I click preview then maybe I'll buy it. end of story
Okonoko
If iTunes/Amazon previews go away, I'm 99% less likely to buy that song or album.
Displaying 1–17 of 17