The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
The music industry bailout is here: Obama Sides with RIAA, MPAA; Backs ACTA Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 16th March 2010
  #31
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
...OR, you COULD have your OWN damn "outlet," and keep ALL the money!

(A larger slice of a smaller pie.)

Do whatever you want, but I'd rather have 100% of 3000 sales than 3% of 100,000 sales.
who wouldn't? But who's actually doing it? Selling 3,000 units that is... from their own website?
Old 16th March 2010
  #32
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
who wouldn't? But who's actually doing it? Selling 3,000 units that is... from their own website?
About the same amount who are selling 100,000 or more the other way.
Old 16th March 2010
  #33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The point is that people deserve to have a choice and full control over how their intellectual property is used.
As usual, the man totally hits the nail on the head.
It's not about forcing creative people to sign up with middle men, or forcing creative people to do everything for themselves.
Choice!.... people.
Old 16th March 2010
  #34
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson
The point is that people deserve to have a choice and full control over how their intellectual property is used.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
As usual, the man totally hits the nail on the head.
It's not about forcing creative people to sign up with middle men, or forcing creative people to do everything for themselves.
Choice!.... people.
Exactly!

(Don't get suckered into a false dichotomy!)
Old 17th March 2010
  #35
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
...But they are not the only organizations sapping your wealth. Even without using a major label, these guys nickle and dime ya to death.
As a small time writer myself, I understand I'm giving away a percentage of my income. However I have not the time or the tools to collect the money for myself.
I've written music for BBC films that have been shown all over the world, even on a few airlines.
PRS collects money for me from Croatia, South Africa, new Zealand, Brazil etc, etc......
Any idea what the paperwork and beaurocracy involved is?
I do, and I can well do without it.
I'm very to pay ASCAP, BMI, PRS a reasonable fee, because the actual reality (rather than your fantasy) is that the money would be lost to me otherwise.
Old 17th March 2010
  #36
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
As a small time writer myself, I understand I'm giving away a percentage of my income. However I have not the time or the tools to collect the money for myself.
I've written music for BBC films that have been shown all over the world, even on a few airlines.
PRS collects money for me from Croatia, South Africa, new Zealand, Brazil etc, etc......
Any idea what the paperwork and beaurocracy involved is?
I do, and I can well do without it.
I'm very to pay ASCAP, BMI, PRS a reasonable fee, because the actual reality (rather than your fantasy) is that the money would be lost to me otherwise.
I'm not here to tell you what to do (quite the opposite, really).

But just because YOU don't know how to do something does NOT mean that it is undoable.

...And its NOT a "fantasy."

THIS guy's already doing it! (Yes, several thousand units, self-distributed):

PacoStrickland.com
Old 17th March 2010
  #37
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
But just because YOU don't know how to do something does NOT mean that it is undoable.
Correction. I know how to do it.
The paperwork for one strand of payment for one country (Germany) is a tad complicated and time consuming for a start.
then I have to track all my work, find out which countries my TV films are being shown in.
Probably spending more time tracking and form filling for past work, no time to make new work.
Old 17th March 2010
  #38
Gear Addict
 

I'm missing something. What does selling records have to do with ASCAP/BMI?
Old 17th March 2010
  #39
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by terryhart View Post
I'm missing something. What does selling records have to do with ASCAP/BMI?
BMI & ASCAP are agencies which handle the licensing of music (for a price, and with their rules).

Licensing is giving permission to others (under the rules of the license) for the use of your music.

Selling records is one of those uses.
Old 17th March 2010
  #40
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
BMI & ASCAP are agencies which handle the licensing of music (for a price, and with their rules).

Licensing is giving permission to others (under the rules of the license) for the use of your music.

Selling records is one of those uses.
BMI & ASCAP only license public performances. They have nothing to do with selling records.
Old 17th March 2010
  #41
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by terryhart View Post
BMI & ASCAP only license public performances. They have nothing to do with selling records.
This is true. (Sorry my post was misleading). They do not handle ALL licensing.

The right to license license all uses is initially with the artist. It is then often transferred to others, and as you have pointed out, it is usually divided for different uses.


...But before we get too far down the wrong road here, I would like to clarify that my main point here is that while it is getting harder and harder for these Dinosaur Organizations to handle this stuff, it is getting easier and easier for artists to handle it themselves.

It is only a matter of time before these huge outfits become largely useless to more and more artists, and they know it. That is why they are lobbying hard to change the laws before the artists catch on and tell them to "take a hike" (just like the artists are now starting to do with the labels).

I know a lot of musicians who freely license their stuff for radio and club play (for no charge) 'cause they know it helps them sell records. Licensing agencies HATE that idea, 'cause its their "bread and butter."

The guy I pointed out handles all his own stuff "in house" with just he and his wife. (And if he wasn't battling cancer right now, he'd be living quite comfortably.)
Old 17th March 2010
  #42
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rectifier View Post
What will happen is .. instead of accepting they will be disconnected if illegally downloading, there will be a massive surge (already happening) in vpn/remote host types of services. Will the pirates buy their music? No they will spend it on the service allowing them to get away with untraceable downloading. There will be a massive backlash and word of mouth will spread about these services and the companies making these services will ride the wave and make a ton of money. Then it's back to legislation, new laws in attempt to stop these services but they will find a way to host this service (such as what is happening with RS now being HQ'd in Switzerland) at a location that does not follow these laws that are trying to be enforced.
The thing is:
A BIG part of the reason piracy is so prevelant right now... It's too dam easy to just type in the song(s)/ect you want into your favorite search engine, and boom.. dozens of illegal sites pop up.

If it's so easy for the average downloader to find these sites... using that same logic...

>Wouldn't it be just as easy to find for the regulators?

..or am i missing something here?
Old 17th March 2010
  #43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
The thing is:
A BIG part of the reason piracy is so prevelant right now... It's too dam easy to just type in the song(s)/ect you want into your favorite search engine, and boom.. dozens of illegal sites pop up.

If it's so easy for the average downloader to find these sites... using that same logic...

>Wouldn't it be just as easy to find for the regulators?

..or am i missing something here?
right - anything easy enough for consumers to use on the size and scale we have now, is easy enough for the authorities to use in the same way.

the argument goes, people will get more crafty, go underground, etc - great - not everyone is going to go there - the problem we have now is the ease, accessibility and scale... once those are effectively removed from the equation we're back to just keeping honest people honest, because we all know you can't stop criminal activity with laws, you can only create consequences when caught.
Old 17th March 2010
  #44
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post

...But before we get too far down the wrong road here, I would like to clarify that my main point here is that while it is getting harder and harder for these Dinosaur Organizations to handle this stuff, it is getting easier and easier for artists to handle it themselves.
If you're not talking about PRO's like ASCAP and BMI, than what "Dinosaur Organizations" are you talking about?

And what support do you have for your statement that it's getting harder and harder for these yet-unnamed "Dinosaur Organizations" to handle licensing?

Quote:

It is only a matter of time before these huge outfits become largely useless to more and more artists, and they know it. That is why they are lobbying hard to change the laws before the artists catch on and tell them to "take a hike" (just like the artists are now starting to do with the labels).
What laws are you talking about that would make it harder for artists to license their music on their own? I'm curious since I'm not aware of any lobbying efforts in this area.

Quote:
I know a lot of musicians who freely license their stuff for radio and club play (for no charge) 'cause they know it helps them sell records. Licensing agencies HATE that idea, 'cause its their "bread and butter."

The guy I pointed out handles all his own stuff "in house" with just he and his wife. (And if he wasn't battling cancer right now, he'd be living quite comfortably.)
Again, what support do you have that "Licensing agencies" hate the idea of artists licensing on their own? Did I miss a news announcement from Harry Fox? Is SoundExchange running a "Home Licensing is Killing Music" campaign?
Old 17th March 2010
  #45
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

I think the best support for my stated opinion is just how touchy some people seem to be about it!

Hell, I don't care who you make a deal with.

Let's just watch it play out.
Old 17th March 2010
  #46
I think you're just mixing up your dinosaurs.

I'm 100% behind self releasing, hustling your own licensing opportunities in film & tv etc....
I'm not into chasing down payments, especially from small bars in San Jose, or a radio station in Latvia - for that I trust PRS (who are the same as ASCAP/BMI).
Old 17th March 2010
  #47
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I think you're just mixing up your dinosaurs.

I'm 100% behind self releasing, hustling your own licensing opportunities in film & tv etc....
I'm not into chasing down payments, especially from small bars in San Jose, or a radio station in Latvia - for that I trust PRS (who are the same as ASCAP/BMI).
Well, yeah. I'm mixing them up on purpose. To me, they pretty much go in the same category. Just like GovCo, they produce nothing, and consume much.

When a beehive starts to have too many drones, they just kill 'em off. (We humans have to be a little more gentle about it, though.)

I have seen the tactics employed by ASCAP, etc. when extracting money from those little bars, and it often borders on something you'd expect to see on The Sopranos. (And most of the smaller artists never really get much out of it.)

I certainly don't want to outlaw licensing agencies; I believe in the freedom to contract. I just think they're a little too big for their britches, and could stand to be brought down a peg or two.

...And yeah, you bet ALL these companies try to influence legislation to their advantage (just like any other corporate industry).
Old 17th March 2010
  #48
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
.But before we get too far down the wrong road here, I would like to clarify that my main point here is that while it is getting harder and harder for these Dinosaur Organizations to handle this stuff, it is getting easier and easier for artists to handle it themselves.
Please clarify how easy it is for me to collect monies from 30+ countries around the world in 24 different time zones, speaking dozens of different languages while I'm trying to write 4 minutes of music a day?

Without PRO's, writers are screwed. Plain and simple. I'm not 100% thrilled with how they divide up the money, but it's a HELL of a lot better than trying to secure those funds myself.

I'm thrilled that there's organizations around the world that are taking their cut in the license of my music.
Old 17th March 2010
  #49
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
I know a lot of musicians who freely license their stuff for radio and club play (for no charge) 'cause they know it helps them sell records. Licensing agencies HATE that idea, 'cause its their "bread and butter."
Wrong. That's what direct licenses are all about, and every writer is 100% capable of doing exactly that. Have BMI license your music, and cut a direct license if the venue doesn't allow for BMI writers. It's a win / win.
Old 17th March 2010
  #50
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Wrong. That's what direct licenses are all about, and every writer is 100% capable of doing exactly that. Have BMI license your music, and cut a direct license if the venue doesn't allow for BMI writers. It's a win / win.
Well, then why even involve BMI in the first place?
Old 17th March 2010
  #51
Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Please clarify how easy it is for me to collect monies from 30+ countries around the world in 24 different time zones, speaking dozens of different languages while I'm trying to write 4 minutes of music a day?
12ax7, amongst all the negative rhetoric you still haven't answered this.....
Old 17th March 2010
  #52
I was afraid that Obama would side with the labels instead of the artists. Money, of course. It will only apply in "participating countries", so we can bring in the usual suspects. This is being discussed in another thread on this sub-forum. I'm an ASCAP member, but I agree with 12ax7 to an extent. Too many middlemen in an age where they are becoming less and less necessary. This smells of a bailout, indeed, indirect as it is.

This, however, is my primary concern:

No Performance Tax Home

This thing is only going to hurt us all in the long run. Most of this money will head overseas! Why didn't they bail out Edsel and Studebaker and the like? I could kick Bush's ass for starting this mess. We could've just let it happen and SELF regulate.

Last edited by johnny nowhere; 17th March 2010 at 02:05 PM.. Reason: insertion
Old 17th March 2010
  #53
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny nowhere View Post
...Most of this money will head overseas! ...
Actually the exact opposite will happen because of the dominance of US artists around the world. Don't believe the NAB's hype. Europe has far better radio than we have yet they pay artists and writers dollars for every play instead of the pennies paid only to songwriters here.
Old 17th March 2010
  #54
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny nowhere View Post
I was afraid that Obama would side with the labels instead of the artists. Money, of course.
hmmm... don't artist need money too? how exactly is Obama siding w/ labels instead of artists, when both need to be protected and paid?

why do you see this as a label issue and not an artist issue?

what could he have done to "side with the artists" that would enable them to be protected against piracy and get paid for their labor?

these protections benefit everyone in the foodchain - the point you are missing is that by protecting copyright, and enforcement against piracy, he is helping the artist - and, probably more than the labels!
Old 17th March 2010
  #55
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by carllock View Post
Good times.

For europeans yes, for Americans, no.
Old 17th March 2010
  #56
Obama is predictable. He's siding with the trial lawyers, his biggest supporters besides the SEIU.

It's payback time for all that election money they funneled into the campaign.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 17th March 2010
  #57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams View Post
Obama is predictable. He's siding with the trial lawyers, his biggest supporters besides the SEIU.

It's payback time for all that election money they funneled into the campaign.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
and it's about time to get some justice.

Obama DOJ pick: RIAA lawyer who killed Grokster | Politics and Law - CNET News

Biden's Briefing: Media, Anti-Piracy 'Big Dogs' Convene... — Digital Music News

Department of Justice Announces IP Task Force... — Digital Music News
Old 17th March 2010
  #58
More like "Just Us".

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 17th March 2010
  #59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams View Post
More like "Just Us".

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Jim - I'm confused, are you for or against the protection and enforcements of copyrights so that artist can be paid for their labor? Are you a musician?
Old 17th March 2010
  #60
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
12ax7, amongst all the negative rhetoric you still haven't answered this.....
By "negative rhetoric," I assume you mean my referring to large collective organizations (only ONE type of which is licensing) as "Dinosaurs."

Well, just like dinosaurs, there was life BEFORE there were large corporate labels, and I predict that there will be life AFTER large corporate labels. Same goes for huge management conglomerates, licensing agencies, and political government. This opinion is based upon observation of the rise and fall of such things in the past. They usually collapse under their own weight, and don't really think its "negative rhetoric" to advance the opinion that it will happen again. (And granted, BMI, ASCAP and GovCo will probably last longer than their fellow dinos.)

...With that said, let's address your question:
Originally Posted by drBill
Please clarify how easy it is for me to collect monies from 30+ countries around the world in 24 different time zones, speaking dozens of different languages while I'm trying to write 4 minutes of music a day?
Well, I guess if you are REALLY operating at that level, and if you feel the need to micromanage payment every time your record gets played in "public," I guess that business model makes sense. ...But consider this: The truth is that licensing agencies do not have the ability to actually do that. They average things out with estimated play, and in fact estimate nearly every aspect of the management of these things. And even with the 'economy of scale' at work, they spend a lot of money operating what is largely a fear-based collection system.

Its really more like working as a bartender or waitress in a bar where there's a mandatory gratuity, and the "tips" are pooled and divided at the end of the shift as per the house rules.

But, hey: Far be it from me to tell you what kind of deals to make! Just like those bartenders, I say let 'em work where they like the deal, and I'll patronize the places I like.

YMMV, but many artists consider "public performance" plays of their stuff on the radio and in clubs is a pretty good trade for the exposure it gives their product and the sales it generates. This is exemplified by cases where the expense of payola was far in excess of what was taken in through licensing!


But please read this:

I had no intent to derail this thread into a discussion over licensing! In retrospect, it was probably counter-productive to include these particular organizations on my "dinolist." (I really expected more argument over including GovCo on the list, but I guess governments are more universally despised, and I find this encouraging!)

The point I was trying to make was that changes in technology have brought about a climate where some new business models are surprisingly effective, and that large established organizations FEAR this, and use their massive lobbying power (and YOUR money) to protectively influence legislation in THEIR favor, sometimes with questionable effects upon those they ostensibly serve.

A fine example of this was the initial proposal for the 2007 royalty rates increase for internet radio stations. This little proposal would have provided for a modest increase in royalties payed by ClearChannel and the like, while it forced internet radio services with new business models to pay 7.5% of gross revenue (the highest royalty paid by any class of broadcaster in the US), which would effectively put them out of business!

RIAA lobbied HARD for this proposal, and they were very clever to write the proposal in such a way that the large established broadcasters would keep their mouths shut for obvious reasons.

By the way, one of the most effective voices for the more reasonable rates we ended up with was Bill Goldsmith of Radio Paradise, who has developed a surprisingly effective business model in which you pay what you want, whenever you want (or not at all). You can listen for free (don't even have to register).

His service is a FOR-profit business, but is listener supported with NO commercials. Who would have ever thought THAT would work? ...But he's been doing it for a few years now, and appears to be doing rather well with it. (It is also a VERY cool station, and you should check it out by clicking HERE.)

...Of course, there are other examples, like what Stephen King tried to do with a "download it for free and pay whatever you want" model (which failed miserably).

Again, my original point was that large collective organizations, once established, put self-preservation at the top of the agenda. And they have no compunction about using their considerable weight to change things to their advantage even when it is not in the best interest of the artists they are supposed to be working for.

...So don't just listen to the words being spoken by politicians, pundits, and spokesmen for these organizations. Take a good long hard look at what is actually being written into law before you decide if its really good for us.

(Sorry to be long-winded, but I think that needed saying.)
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
rack gear / Music Business
19

Forum Jump
Forum Jump