Things are changing rapidly in the entertainment industry and they're scrambling to keep up....with a lot of missteps along the way.
All of the studios, by putting up downloads and streaming, of which they get revenue for either by payment or advertising are cackling all the way to the bank because all the wording in previous contracts didn't specify a medium that didn't yet exist.
If you think the studios finding a loophole and making more money instead of the helping support the artists of the product they are exploiting (is a good thing), then fine, I guess I can't argue with you.
The sad part is the people who put in the least amount of effort (record labels) collect the most, while the people who actually create it get screwed.
People should do what they LOVE not whatever will pay the best.
So is it your assertion that the studios were "far minded" enough to realize all these future distribution methods and their accompanying revenue streams would come along and were able to take advantage of it when drafting contracts because the artists were not?
If the studios are paying legal experts good money to find loopholes to exploit in existing contracts, why isn't your industry doing the same to force them to close those loopholes and pay you all your share of the revenues gained?
I expect it is because your industry has allowed itself to be put in a position where it's at the mercy of it's employer (the studios and their agents). You signed away many of your rights and the ones you didn't sign away you effectively abrogated because you refused to defend them in the face of your employers. So now because you can't touch them, your industry is trying to extract these missing revenues from the consumer because they're all that is left to shakedown.
Well, if you think shaking down the consumers to get the monies you now can't get from your employers because of your own inability / refusal to do so is fine, I guess I can't argue with you, either.
Yes, but that is the profession they are in, much like me in the architecture field, most architects make not nearly as much as construction managers and so on, but i love what i do so it evens out. They could be in a job where they make more money, but i'm sure its not nearly as fun as playing music.
Second, I'm not sure I'm understanding the point about the royalties decreasing from broadcast television. I was under the impression that it was paid per each time that the tv episode or movie aired? If less people are watching, that shouldn't affect the amount paid- it's still being aired. Are they paying according to Nielsen ratings or something? I would like to hear more about this point.
This isn't about the recording industry and the labels, this is about the writers and the publishers.
The writers and publishers have a right to make money for their work, including when their work is distributed digitally or by whatever new medium comes along.
When new technologies come along, artists and writers get screwed by the distributors because the "new way" they're selling their product wasn't specifically stated in the original contract (because the medium didn't exist!)
This is like when sitcom stars and writers receive no royalties on the sale of DVD's because DVD's didn't exist when they're contracts were written in the 1970s. Or all the writers and artists who made ZERO on the sale of CD's when that technology first came out. Should they not be entitled to fair royalties when their work continues to be sold?
No distributor or business conglomerate is going to WILLINGLY pay anyone a single penny more than they have to. They would be happy to collect all of the money for future sales and pay zero royalties if they could get away with it. The only way to force them into fair business practices is through legislation.
The greed is not on the part of the artists, writers, and publishers, it's with the fat cat distributors.
EDIT: I'm amazed reading most of the opinions here. You're defending the multi-billion dollar distribution conglomerates and calling the individual, independent writers and artists greedy. Yeah, defend those corporations against the little guys folks. That's exactly what the the conglomerates that own the news services reporting this want you to think. Congratulations.
Absolutely ridiculous. Should I as a game developer charge people to play demos of my products? Or should we pay to watch film trailers?
The stupidity of these guys is mindblowing.![]()
Agreed. It's called product placement. A domain Apple really knows how to work with.
sorry i am confused by this statement. it sounds like your trying to be sarcastic and funny. but what does being asian have to do with it? could you explain your comment?
why do you work at targe? I'm not knocking it, but I bet you're working there because you're young and in school. which is fine. however, I'm willing to bet 100% of the world population would like to make a goodliving, right? 100% of the population would like to pull in a comfortable paycheck every 2 weeks. however, not everyone can. sometimes they don't get lucky and land that job; sometimes they aren't qualified; sometimes they commited crimes and it prevenst them from getting the job; sometimes they are discriminated against and turned down. regardless….everyone wants to make good money, but not everyone can. just because someone wants good money doesn’t mean they have to be a steve jobs in a multi-billion $ company. some people make a lot of $ just playing the lotto or sports or having a 1-hit-wonder song.
who really cares target boy? it was an example. use whatever "waiter wage" you want….i don't care; just an example.
I don't think TARGET is your dream job bro. not to knock Target, love the Merona clothing, but people don't grow up saying "my dream job is working the checkout at Target". you'd take a job that paid you double what you're making in a heartbeat if you could.
no you don't. millions get scholarships for their college. I did. Full ride. Some get scholarships from grades or some from sports or some from ethical backgrounds. regarless…you don't have to spend a single penny to go to school.
what, are you serious? for real…….why do I need to define a higher paying job. just name ANY job that pays more than what you're making at TARGET and that's a higher paying job. duh. YOU need to think a bit before lashing out.
if you didn't care, you wouldn't have replied to my post.
why don't you just reach into my pockets and be the leach you are for the rest of my life. You sold the rights, well if those rights are only a rental for what you sold then I believe it is fraud. Either you have the rights or you don't. Stop sucking on the consumers for more money! I bought the song now you want a per play "performance fee" screw you and everyone like you! If i roll down my window while playing your song it is not a public broadcast you morons it is fair use, I hope you get the meds you need and stop trying to gouge me.Again, there is no composers union and there likely never will be. All we have are ASCAP and BMI, which are not nearly as powerful as unions. And that is what they are doing right now!! They are approaching congress to try and close these loopholes!! It's not like there's this big "hey folks, come draft your contract" call by the studios and we all line up. You say "your industry" as if all industries are the same and there is a powerful figure head at the top of each of them that can barge in and make demands.
We signed away rights like copyright ownership because there are things like performance rights. As the industry shifts on how people get this content, so should the royalties we get.
What are you talking about? We are asking studios for our fair share, not consumers. If you are watching a show on Hulu for free right now, and later you are still watching it for free, but the artists get a tiny fraction of the revenue generated through ads and the like, just like when a show airs on TV, how is that "shaking down the consumer?" It's completely behind the scenes. And, if a studio demands a rise in price of a TV show from $1.99 because they have to pay me a fraction of a penny, then you need to direct your anger towards them.
The RIAA, the MPAA, and the like are all greedy bastards. First of all, they are scared because nowadays there really isn't a whole lot of talent. Alot of what's being heard today (this is not fact, just my opinion) is over-processed, auto-tuned cookie cutter CRAP that isn't worth the CD it's printed on.
There is so much misinformation being spread on this forum today.
I'll put it this way:
when a composer writes a music cue for a television show, he will receive performance royalties when the show airs. He will receive mechanical royalties if a soundtrack cd or DVD is sold. Currently, he will receive no money when someone downloads the tv show. This was not due to "bad negotiation" but due to the fact that when the contracts were negotiated, digital downloads of a tv show were not around. When they came about, nobody knew how to classify them, and therefore didn't classify them.
Now the composers would like to get paid for the work they did, when the tv/film studios make money off of their contributions.
I currently make $8.75 an hour, thats 35 cents above min. wadge. I push carts. That alone is manual labor (even though I have a cart pusher)I might be transfering over to the food court that makes 9 bucks an hour.
Every 2 weeks my average pay check is above $400, giuven I work 20-40 hours every 2 weeks
I, along with most of my co-workers are happy with our jobs and our pay. Thats the real problem with this new generation. they want money money money.
"waiter"? please gwet your head out of your ass. There are more jobs out there thin just working oin a restrunt.
I actually wanted to get in to retail. and given you been at target to buy our merona clothing you should know there is more posisions at target then being a cashier.
not everyone is a freaken sports freak. All sports do is cause problems. players hit eachother/other teams. Fans get all crazzy. its a mess
So now your going on about me working in a large retailer. at least I'm not working at Wal-mart.
I'm happy with my job. Pay is decent, i have great co-workers and bosses and each day is fun and exciting. The guests (AKA customers) are the main thing that makes it fun and exciting
I dont care about you breaking the law. I do care about you going on and on about peoples choices in jobs.
BMI and ASCAP negotiate their rates with television and radio stations based on the size of the audience. So yes, the performance fees are directly related to how many people are watching.
Yet when BMI and ASCAP have suggested that companies like Hulu or YouTube pay based on how many people have streamed a video, these companies have claimed this was not a fair business model for them.
The other issue is this: is there really a difference between watching a movie on YouTube, downloading it from iTunes, or ordering it on demand from your local cable company? Shouldn't there be a similar model to pay royalties for all of these methods? In the end, the same people are sitting in their living room watching the movie. Why should one be worthy of a performance royalty but not the other?
Hey, it's all cool. I'm glad for you actually. You seem like a responsible kid with a good head on their shoulders. Too many bad apples out there getting into trouble and not being responsible/respectable.
I'm proud for you. Keep up the hard work!!![]()
Didn't want to read 11 pages to see if this was posted.
Not that either of these performers are part of this...but Beyonce made 87 million last year and Madonna, I think, over 100 Mil. Do they really need the income from a 30 second clip? These are just two examples of how poor our music industry is that they need more?
I don't think anyone is suing iTunes. Granted, iTunes was made an example of, and they shouldn't be. It's not their responsibility, it's the labels/studios they deal with, and that is what ASCAP, BMI etc are going to congress to address. The press is just using iTunes as "hot topic" to attract attention. The only reason iTunes is really brought up is because it is simply the most popular distribution method of digital distribution. To say it's iTunes that is at fault is disingenuous and sensationalistic.
Most of their money is made from touring and merchandise sales.Didn't want to read 11 pages to see if this was posted.
Not that either of these performers are part of this...but Beyonce made 87 million last year and Madonna, I think, over 100 Mil. Do they really need the income from a 30 second clip? These are just two examples of how poor our music industry is that they need more?