SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NBCNews reports that changes are coming for the music industry, and Big Music is not happy about it.
For years, in cases where ASCAP (the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) or BMI (Broadcast Music Inc) did not represent all of the authors of a song, they would issue fractional licenses and presume that the licensee would ensure others were paid. Instead, the Justice Department's new rules would require "full-work" licenses.
We've all heard stories about some song-writers or lyricists being cut out out of the proceeds of music sales because they were not members of these big licensing agencies, never signed a release of rights, or a variety of other issues. Big Music (ASCAP and BMI) more or less ignored these artists, assuming they would get their share via some other means. Of course, in the end, that usually meant somebody pocketed all the money and somebody else didn't get paid. That's not how it is supposed to work.
BMI said in a statement that it would fight the change in court, while ASCAP said it would press for legislative reform. The groups said in a press release that the decision "will cause unnecessary chaos in the marketplace and place unfair financial burdens and creative constraints on songwriters and composers."
This all arose after Big Music claimed that the internet music streaming services were under-paying for song streamed, and cheating artists. They complained to the DOJ and wanted to renegotiate a 1941 era consent decree. It appears the DOJ agrees that some artists were indeed being cheated, but not necessarily by streaming services.
Some artists refuse to let their music be streamed simply because they believe it is being pirated at alarming rates. Other artists are waking up to the music industry's games.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 05 2016, @10:36AM
After hearing so many horror stories from the artists themselves, relating to the "business games" played on them with contract trickery, I can't see the artists taking a hit for copyright violation... rather it seems to be the creators of trickery are seeing what they sent out come back.
Seems like there are 5% of us that actually do any work, 45% of us figure out how to profit off the 5%, where maybe 50% of us rely on the government to tax the whole shebang and send us a check.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 05 2016, @04:55PM
Your numbers are seriously off. Probably closer to 50% doing work, 40% profiting by doing nothing, and 10% receiving a check from collected taxes (in all forms of welfare).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 06 2016, @07:55AM
Actually, I got those numbers using the standard Thetford analysis ( derived from the Stetson-Harrison method ).
My numbers are the result of observation where I always seem to see one guy with a shovel in his hand, and five supervisors watching him.
(Score: 4, Informative) by mcgrew on Friday August 05 2016, @05:31PM
ASCAP is evil and shake down innocent bar owners, some of whom I know personally. They're extortionists. One guy I knew hosed bands who played only their own, original music. Another hosted only folk bands, and folk music is all in the public domain. But they pay because the ASCAP "fee" (i.e., ransom) is less than what it would cost to fight their extortion in court.
One of them (the folk music guy) simply stopped having live bands.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org