Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday August 05 2016, @09:56AM   Printer-friendly
from the didn't-see-THAT-one-coming dept.

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.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Friday August 05 2016, @05:37PM

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Friday August 05 2016, @05:37PM (#384565) Homepage Journal

    Oh, for Christ's sake, music IS an art form, just as painting, sculpture, or literature. A live performance isn't "content" but a recorded one is; the CD contains the music.

    Of course, not all art is good art. But it's still art. You ARE an artist whether or not you choose to acknowledge it.

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Saturday August 06 2016, @01:27AM

    by urza9814 (3954) on Saturday August 06 2016, @01:27AM (#384668) Journal

    Oh, for Christ's sake, music IS an art form, just as painting, sculpture, or literature. A live performance isn't "content" but a recorded one is; the CD contains the music.

    Of course, not all art is good art. But it's still art. You ARE an artist whether or not you choose to acknowledge it.

    I think this is kinda like when people use "PC" to refer to Windows systems only, and many geeks will sit there going "Well, a Mac is still a Personal Computer, so is a Linux system, so is my cellphone really..." If you mean "Windows system", just say "Windows system". Likewise, if the word you want is "musician", just say "musician". It's a pretty common trend, using intentionally vague language in an effort to seem more intelligent or something. My father (an attorney) used to give the example that his clients will often say "vehicle" when they damn well know that vehicle was a car, and "car" provides far more information, but they want to use big words to sound smart for the lawyer. Also like when you boss refers to "the deliverable" when it's one piece of code which he certainly knows the name of.

    But of course, if you call yourself an "artist" then you get to say you produce "Works of Art"...if you're a "musician" then you only produce "music"...

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Saturday August 06 2016, @04:48AM

      by dry (223) on Saturday August 06 2016, @04:48AM (#384696) Journal

      What about the case when you have a poet teaming up with a musician to create the art? Shit, Jim Morrison always referred to himself as a poet. As art, musicianship and poetry have a lot of overlap but are still considered separate forms of art. Then there are bands like Pink Floyd whose art consisted of much more then music, light shows, story telling, even films. "Outside the Wall, the Bleeding Hearts and the Artists"
      Musicianship is a type of art, but the best musical artists go beyond just music.