music industry

Where does inspiration stop and infringement begin?

Erin McKeown is a two-time MMT Fammy winner, featured performer, and former Free Friday pick. And she writes hit songs. Allegedly. You’ll see.

Her essay below originally appeared in Techdirt, where it garnered over 140 comments, split between supporters and detractors of her copyright suit. Over on Gearslutz.com, someone called out a few of the more egregious anonymous comments under the misdirected title “Why does TechDirt Hate Musicians?” For instance:

Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2012 @ 4:09pm

Stop the lawsuit now and get to work.

Today I had to get up and go to work to earn my money. I worked back in 2003 also, but nobody is paying me for that work today. Why should they pay you?

Did you contact everyone who inspired your song? Who you copied from? No? So why should you expect them to contact you? All creations are fundamentally derivative; yours is not special.

So the meta-battle between copyright, copyleft, and trolls took over, with Mike Masnick’s defense of the original posting pulling in more than twice as many reactions as Erin’s essay. We intend to turn the attention back to Erin’s individual case, so let’s start with her story.


A HIT IS A HIT IS A HIT, RIGHT?

photo by Nancy Palmieri

I always knew my song “Slung-lo” was a hit.

It just took longer than I expected.

“Slung-lo” came out on my 2003 album, grand (Nettwerk). It found its way to the Brittany Murphy masterpiece “Uptown Girls” and into episodes of “Roswell”, “Gilmore Girls”, and “Privileged”. It also found its way into a Tesco F&F commercial, which ran in the Czech Republic in the summer of 2008. Though not a hit by any means, it was a remarkably long life for a song that came out in 2003.

And then last year, I received two separate emails through my website pointing me to this video for a song called “Touch The Sun” sung by the Czech artist, Debbi. (editor’s note: we tried to embed the official video for this song, but Sony Music refuses to allow an embed on the song).

“Have you seen this?” both emails asked. I hadn’t.

From the first moment I heard “Touch The Sun,” it was as clear to me as anything that someone had taken the DNA of my song “Slung-lo” and turned it into another song. At this point, my lawyer wants me to make very clear that IN MY OPINION, THIS IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

If you want to hear my song again, here’s “Slung-lo” on YouTube or you can click here for a free download from me.

I don’t want to spend a lot of time technically breaking down the two songs, but I’d like to point out a few things. Among the many substantial similarities between them, check out the lyrical content (weather as metaphor for happiness), the almost exact song structure (solo verse, band verse, double-tracked vocal in the chorus…), and the vocal cadence in unison with the descending instrumental line in the chorus. I could go on.

Debbi’s “Touch The Sun” isn’t the proverbial “kid in the bedroom with a laptop” who remixes pop culture and makes mash-ups to show how alike we humans really are. No, it turns out the song was written for a commercial scale beer campaign by the giant European alcohol company Metaxa, which itself is a subsidiary of the global beverage conglomerate Remy Cointreau.

And it is a hit. A huge one. Debbi was the runner up on the Czech version of the “Idol” franchise. The song won “Song of the Year” at the Czech version of the Grammys. The original video that was sent to me has almost a million hits. A quick search of YouTube reveals karaoke versions, animations, “how to play versions,” and plenty of people in their bedrooms playing the song and singing along. The beer ad with the song aired across the Czech Republic more than 1200 times in September of 2010. That’s about 40 times a day.

So, after all this time, “Slung-lo” is finally a hit.

The easy part of this story is that I work with an amazing publishing administrator, Duchamp, who has stepped in to help me. We’ve retained Czech council who have been in contact with Metaxa, Debbi’s record label (Sony!), and the Slovak production house that produced the track. All have denied any infringement, declined to settle, and at this point, court proceedings have started. My lawyers estimate that this could take anywhere from one to five years.

This spring Remy re-launched the ad campaign across all of Europe.

By the way, the writers are Tomas Zubak, Peter Graus, and Maros Kachut. Let’s #kony2012 them.

Actually let’s not.

Instead, I want to talk about the whole host of emotions this experience has brought up for me, and the way it’s forced me to confront and articulate my beliefs about copyright.

After watching the video for the first time, I was certifiably apoplectic. I was physically shaking with anger. How dare they! I wasn’t so much angry at Debbi — who, from what I eventually read, really just sang the damn thing — as I was at the writers. They had to know what they were doing, I fumed. I mean, the song was just in a commercial there. They had to know about it. How dare they!

And then I felt small. I’m nobody, I thought, so they probably figured they could get away with it. It’s not like they ripped off Beyonce. Just small-time me.

And then I felt defeated. I’ve always wanted to have a hit like “Touch The Sun”. And I thought I wrote one in 2003. It was such a great disappointment to me that no one noticed. There will never be enough people to notice me, I thought.

And then, I would find myself dreaming. Maybe I’ll get a settlement. Maybe it will be large enough to make all my problems go away. I’ll be able to pay for my new record. I’ll be able to afford the best marketing and publicity money can buy. And then there will be some left over to buy a house. My life will change!

Finally, I disconnected. I couldn’t tell very many people about what was happening, and the feelings were overwhelming me. Ok, I thought, I’ll just let the lawyers do their lawyer thing. This is why you pay them. I am powerless. Breathe deep and exhale.

Very early in the process, my lawyers asked me what I wanted to be the goal of my settlement. Did I want 100% of the money made? Did I want a flat fee? How much? Did I want a public apology? Did I want to let it go? Did I just want credit?

These questions became a spiritual exercise. I began to think that how I answered them said something about who I was as a person.

I believe that creativity is an unpredictable, mysterious process. I often have no idea where a song comes from. Other times I am more aware of the hard work. It is not always an easy thing to know where influence ends and mimicry begins. But there is also a way we recognize ourselves in the faces of our children, and a gut instinct that tells me when I am hearing my own musical fingerprint.

I thought for awhile, and decided I would like 50% of all the monies made so far, and 50% on everything moving forward. I didn’t need a public apology. I think this is fair, not punitive, and given the current copyright law system and options available to me, a reasonable request.

Now I just have to wait one to five years to see how it turns out.

Recently, I’ve ended up doing a lot of advocacy and policy work around copyright. This isn’t because I am a copyright crusader, for or against, but because the issue gets tied up with so many other things I care about: media access, fair compensation for artists, creating a sustainable music business.

I actually hate to talk about copyright because, once it’s brought up, it just seems to take over any conversation. Most of the time I feel like that conversation then becomes counterproductive. People throw around complex legal principles. The jargon resembles a foreign language. Often, the emotions get so heated that a room ends up divided at just the time when we need to work together. I’ve also noticed that most of the people crowing about copyright aren’t individual copyright holders. They’re groups of people who make money from the business of policing and administering copyright.

In my advocacy, I want to talk scale. I want to talk relationships and power structures. I want to talk about technology. Copyright is part of this, but it’s not the whole enchilada. I’ve come to think that current copyright law is like an immovable boulder in the middle of a rushing river. It’s not likely to change, so I’m going to have to work with it, as it is. And not let it stop other important work.

Yet here I am facing a difficult situation where copyright is the main issue.

I recently watched Kirby Ferguson’s “Everything Is A Remix” series and found it really helpful to understand the feelings that came up for me around “Touch The Sun.” In part four, Kirby makes the observation that we humans are easily and freely influenced and inspired by the world around us. However, when we feel like something has been taken from us, we get very angry and indignant. Our anger is as natural and essentially human as is our borrowing or being influenced.

Really how I feel about copyright is this: can you please just ask me? I am so easily found. One or two clicks, a badly mangled combination of “erin” and “mck” will get you to me. Let me know what you’re doing. Let’s talk. Take some time and connect with me. I know this is imperfect. Sometimes in the creative economy, there just isn’t time. But how about we try?

I’d also like us all to acknowledge that the current copyright system, the unmovable boulder in the stream, rather than protecting rights holders and acting as a deterrent to infringement, is in its very complications a shelter for those who use others’ material without permission and an obstacle to those who would like to legally use or remix content. Whether it is done consciously or unconsciously, nefariously or in communal bliss, given the complicated, arcane process, the myriad hoops to jump through, the length and cost of the process, who can afford to participate?

So Tomas, Peter, and Maros, I won’t assume your motives in turning my song “Slung-lo” into “Touch The Sun.” Instead, I’ll say this: if you asked me, we might have worked something out. When I found you, we might have worked something out. Who knows, maybe we could have advanced the conversation around copyright and made a radical contribution toward a different type of economy. Instead, it will drag on in court. And I will fight it in court as long as I have to. But this could have gone another way. And for that, I am sad.

Special Thanks to Mike King, Andy Sellars, my lawyers, Lawrence Stanley and Vaclav Schovanek, and Erik Gilbert at Duchamp for their help researching and proofing this post.

~ Erin McKeown


 

Here are the two songs available for side-by-side comparison:

YouTube Doubler

All creative work may be derivative, but at what point do influence and inspiration become infringement?  We put that question to a group of listeners including a music professor, a professional musician, a music student, and two music fans.  The first reaction after hearing a few bars of “Slung-lo” was: “How is that song not being used in an Apple commercial?”

More on that later, first we’d like to hear your opinion.  Take the quick, 3-question MMT survey here and let us know how you would rule on Erin’s case.  Let’s assume the case is heard in the US — if there are any Czech copyright experts out there, speak up in the comments below.  Here are some salient points on US law from Alan Korn:

HOW IS INFRINGEMENT PROVED IN A COURT OF LAW?

To establish copyright infringement in a court of law, a copyright owner must establish proof copyright ownership and proof of copying. Proof of copying may be established either by direct evidence of copying (i.e., an admission) or by indirect evidence showing 1) access to the original work; and 2) “substantial similarity” between the original and allegedly infringing work.

Courts will not find copyright infringement if two people independently come up with the same or a “substantially similar” work. Also, the less original a copyrighted work is, the less protection it may be entitled to under copyright law.

HOW DOES ONE SONG “INFRINGE” ANOTHER?

Proving access to a popular song is usually not difficult in copyright litigation. If two works are strikingly similar, some courts may even infer that a defendant had access to the copyrighted work. Whether a work infringes another usually turns on the issue of substantial similarity. In the case of music, courts have ruled that infringement may occur where the “whole meritorious part of the song” is incorporated into another song, without any substantial alteration.

One of the more famous U.S music infringement cases involved ex-Beatle George Harrison, who was found by a jury to have “unconsciously” copied the Shirelle’s composition “He’s So Fine” in his 1971 hit “My Sweet Lord.” Although George Harrison’s hit was found to be strikingly similar to the Shirelle’s song, it is even possible to infringe another song if only just a few notes are “borrowed.” Because the most memorable part of a song may be quite brief, infringement of a musical composition may be found even where only a small portion of a song was copied.

~ Alan Korn

{ 0 comments }

The Metro Music Source & DC Setlist will be hosting a SXSW debrief panel discussion this Thursday, March 29th at The Dunes as part of their monthly music industry meet-up event. Fresh from their return from Austin, Texas, Ryan Holladay of BLUEBRAIN, the Listen Local First team, and promoter Sasha Lord will be sharing their SXSW 2012 experiences. The evening will feature a performance from Gypsy jazz vocalist and Strathmore Artist In Residence, Mary Alouette.

Ryan Holladay is one half of the innovative music duo, BLUEBRAIN. They’ve been featured in everything from WIRED Magazine to the New York Times for their work, which blurs the line between art and technology. Their “location-aware album” for The National Mall is the first ever iPhone app to be included in the Washington Post’s Top 10 Albums of the Year awards. Ryan also serves as the new media curator at Artisphere.

Listen Local First DC (LLF) is a local music initiative devoted to building awareness and creating opportunities for local musicians and venues in order to raise the profile of DC’s local music scene. At the beginning of the year, LLF launched a campaign to get a mobile music venue to SXSW with the aim of showcasing the talent and diversity of the DC area music scene to a wider audience.

With money raised from a Kickstarter campaign, Listen Local First purchased a van, decked it out with sound equipment, and took to the road. They successfully showcased 15 DC bands/ musicians and hosted upwards of 25 different mobile music venue performances over the course of 3 days. The process, adventure and music were documented via their blog, and soon-to-be-released web series.

Sasha Lord co-produced the “DC Does SXSW” event which showcased a diverse set of DC artists including Hume, Deleted Scenes, Edie Sedgwick and DJ Baby Alcatraz. Sasha is the booker and promoter for Comet Ping Pong in DC.

LLF founders Christopher Naoum and René Moffatt will join Sasha and Ryan to share insights from their trip and answer questions from the DC area music community. MMS is an informal monthly music industry meet-up event with the goal of bringing focus to the vibrant DC music scene, encouraging support, collaboration, and knowledge sharing amongst music creators and industry professionals, as well as helping to raise the profile of our music scene on a national level.

The National Mall by BLUEBRAIN. The First Location-Aware Album from BLUEBRAIN on Vimeo.

Past MMS events have brought together local musicians, record label reps, artist managers, publicists, filmmakers, music publishers, producer/engineers, and many others. This month’s event is co-hosted with DC Setlist, a popular music platform which recommends, discovers and discusses all things music in the DC area and beyond.

The evening will end with music from Gypsy jazz vocalist and Strathmore Artist In Residence Mary Alouette. Alouette describes her sound as “Gypsy jazz, post dubstep, beautiful music and dangerous rhythms”. Her core inspiration is the gypsy legend virtuoso guitarist Django Reinhardt, but her musical influences also range from the great Billie Holiday, Nina Simone and Edith Piaf through to progressive contemporaries like Grimes, St. Vincent, and Modeselektor. Mary will be previewing tracks from her debut EP Midas, ahead of her CD Release Show on April 25th at the Mansion at Strathmore.

Runnin’Mary Alouette

When: Thursday, March 29th, 2012
Time: 6pm-9pm
Venue: The Dunes, 1402 Meridian Place, NW Washington, DC 20009
Cost: Free!

{ 0 comments }

BAMM.tv and the future of music

by David D. on February 19, 2012

Free HD video production and global distribution for your music

If you’re making music the world needs to hear, and your best concert footage was captured on a flip-phone, you should check out BAMM.tv. Founded by brothers Chris and Nick Hansen, BAMM.tv works with emerging artists to capture performances in HD video and high-quality audio in their San Francisco studio, or at music festivals and venues around the world. For free.

The typical deal results in 5 videos: one goes to the artist for promotion and distribution through whatever channels they choose. In exchange, BAMM.tv has exclusive rights to distribute the remaining videos through a network with an estimated reach of 15 million people in 150 countries. Net profit will be split 50/50 with the artists.

I spoke with co-founder Chris Hansen, and he expects BAMM will break even in early 2013. But they plan to start paying bands some money before then, in part to test out their payments system. Once they are profitable, artist payments will be based on their percentage of plays on the network.

BAMM continues to sign up distribution partners, which currently include Taiwan’s Chunghwa Telecom, a global deal with Samsung to include a BAMM.tv app on all of their tablets and smartphones, and Flingo, which provides video content to over seven million smart TVs. They are also working on an iPad app that will help promote the participating artists, with a $1,000 cash prize for the “Artist of the Month” and other sponsored promotions.

The future of music and artist compensation

Last September, we wrote about the Future of Music Coaltition and their Artist Revenue Streams project, which they describe as “a multi-method, cross-genre examination of how US-based musicians’ revenue streams are changing, and why.” The project has spawned a new website, and the 29 streams have spread into 40 (or 42, but who’s counting?).

We’ll dig deeper into the ARS results for an upcoming report, but why has BAMM.tv has gone out and created a 43rd revenue stream?  According to Chris:

I don’t think any business model that’s solely reliant upon revenues from copyright and publishing rights is going to survive long-term. The only way forward is providing access to experiences that can’t be downloaded on torrents, and the only way to do that is to ease the grip on traditional rights that made a lot of sense in the 20th century but are long outdated. Spotify seems to be the labels’ collective acknowledgement of this fact, but I still think they have a long road ahead.

First of all, the $100 million raised seems to have gone straight to the labels, and the next mega-round of funding is just around the corner. I look at the unfavorable terms toward streaming services and lack of transparency as well as the mounting cost structure as major competitive disadvantages for Spotify and other streaming services that rely on major label licensing.

On scaling and superstars

So far, BAMM.tv has worked with around 150 bands, and they’re preparing to add to that number with a return trip to SXSW. Although Bay area artists are disproportionately represented, BAMM uses Southby and other festivals to catch up with bands they have been tracking from around the world. They are also looking at adding some sound stages in SF, and recently rented a studio in Amsterdam to produce videos for European acts.

There will always be limits on how many acts can participate, so curation is an essential part of their work.  Happily, they appear to be comfortable traveling outside of the mainstream for talent, as evidenced by the diverse selection of artists in the YouTube playlist above. Artists that are interested in working with BAMM.tv can submit their information here.

Chris is upbeat about the future of BAMM.tv, and looking for innovative ways to get artists paid. In our Music 2.0 series, we have seen that the future of music can’t be just one thing, and the new business models are unlikely to emerge from the entrenched players.  BAMM.tv may succeed in part because they can side-step the obstacles that have been built up by the labels and license holders over the years.

What I like about BAMM’s business model is that our competitive disadvantage is upfront and obvious: we don’t get to work with superstars. After that, things start looking pretty good for us. Our variable cost is extremely low. Our license is straightforward, global, perpetual, and allows us to remix, sample, synch, make derivative works, etc. Therefore we can make deals with OEMs, telcos, MSOs and other service providers at will, and we can afford to commoditize the music product to an extent that the major players cannot.

I hope we are able to demonstrate in the coming months that the choice between piracy and Spotify is a false dilemma. There are other models that work, and we’re quietly pursuing a few that I’m very excited about.

~ Chris Hansen, BAMM.tv

{ 2 comments }

Neil Young on living in the low-rez world

by David D. on February 1, 2012

“We can’t control the back end of the donkey.”

In this clip from the D: Dive Into Media conference, Neil Young begins by saying ”My goal is to try to rescue the art form that I’ve been practicing for the past 50 years.” He goes on to talk about  preserving the album format, how piracy is the new radio, and what Beats headphones bring to the back end of the donkey (more bottom end).

Neil wants to bring more attention to the front end: offering music in high-resolution formats, and making it available conveniently.  That’s what we’re all about, and we will focus on this in the next installment of Hi-Fi 2.0.  Let’s save the 95%!

{ 0 comments }

Zoë Keating: MMT Featured Artist

by David D. on January 8, 2012

An Alt-Classical Artist for the 21st Century

We first featured Zoë Keating as a Free Friday pick in 2010.  Last year she received more mentions in MMT than any other artist — largely due to a guest post she wrote for us: “Zoe Keating on Spotify, Apple and Independents (and lettuce).”

In addition to being at the vanguard of alt-classical music, she has become a leading light for the DIY movement and unofficial spokesperson for indie musicians.  As the handcrafted artisan music blog at the intersection of art, commerce, and technology, Zoë’s story and music have a special resonance with MMT.

Stage fright steered her away from a career as a classical performer and into a liberal arts education at Sarah Lawrence College.  After college, Zoë strengthened her tech skills through the tuition of several dot-com startups while moonlighting as a musician.

Then the dot-com bust provided an opportunity to work at music full-time while doing information architecture on the side.  Everything converged around the cello and MacBook Pro.  Although limiting at first, through advances in technology she is now “dealing with the repercussions of being able to do almost anything.”  And she has dealt with those repercussions quite well — producing music and managing her career with fierce independence and great success.

You can sample some performances and get more information from her featured artist profile, available from the dropdown list at the top of each page and previewed below.

 [click through for full profile]

click through for full profile

zoë keating photo: nadya lev

street signs: steve jobs keynote from the ipad launch

{ 0 comments }

Music 2.0: Battle of the Business Models (part 3)

by David D. on December 17, 2011

What’s the Best Business Model for the Music Industry?

Put simply, a business model is the plan for generating revenue and profits.  For musicians, that means being able to put food on the table and pay the rent.  As Jill Sobule put it, success in the music business “means not having to work a straight job.”

A solo artist may need a different business model than a band, and the business models for musicians will be different than those for music publishers, record labels, and streaming services.  Some of these businesses may be competitors, customers, suppliers, or partners; and taken together they compose (part of) the Music Industry.

So a better question would be:  What business models will work for the music industry in the 21st century?  Vivek Wadhra defines seven basic components of a business model:

  1. Reaching customers
  2. Differentiating your product
  3. Pricing
  4. Selling
  5. Delivery/distribution
  6. Supporting customers
  7. Achieving customer satisfaction

It’s easy to see how most of these activities would apply to the music business, but as an artist, you may be asking: “Hey, where’s the making music part?”  The business model canvas might work better for you.

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder

Pete Townshend and Steve Jobs’ Balls

You may now be thinking: “Is this going to be on the test?  I mean, really, I’d rather not deal with any of this.”  In that case, you should probably be working with a manager you can trust, and earning enough to pay someone else to deal with it.

Which is just the way Pete Townsend liked it.  In the inaugural John Peel lecture last October, Pete waxed nostalgic for the old days, and enumerated the services provided by music industry past:

There were record companies and music publishers. Was it good, what the God of pop music had created?

Music publishing has always been a form of banking in many ways, but – in cooperation with record labels – active artists have always received from the music industry banking system more than banking. They’ve gotten…

1. editorial guidance
2. financial support
3. creative nurture
4. manufacturing
5. publishing
6. marketing
7. distribution
8. payment of royalties (the banking)

Today, if we look solely at iTunes, we see a publishing model that offers only the last two items as a guarantee, distribution and banking, with some marketing thrown in sometimes at the whim of the folks at Apple.

~ Pete Townshend

Having said he once wanted to cut off Steve Jobs’ balls, Pete likens  iTunes to a digital vampire bleeding artists for its “enormous commission.”

David Byrne’s Suvival Strategies

David Byrne takes a more even-handed approach, and describes a spectrum of distribution deals, from the 360 or equity deal to the self-distribution or DIY model.  In order of increasing artist control:

~ Wired: David Byrne’s Survival Strategies for Emerging Artists — and Megastars

While noting that no single model will work for everyone, Byrne does offer some advice:

I would personally advise artists to hold on to their publishing rights (well, as much of them as they can). Publishing royalties are how you get paid if someone covers, samples, or licenses your song for a movie or commercial. This, for a songwriter, is your pension plan.

Increasingly, it’s possible for artists to hold on to the copyrights for their recordings as well. This guarantees them another lucrative piece of the licensing pie and also gives them the right to exploit their work in mediums to be invented in the future — musical brain implants and the like.

Innovation vs. Ideals

Much of the talk about music business models has been around innovation.  The first 66 slides in the presentation below highlight business model innovation in the music industry.

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder

But not everyone has jumped aboard the business model innovation bandwagon.  In part 2, T Bone Burnett suggested that musicians who use the word “monetize” should be ashamed of themselves.  He believes that musicians should be focused on one thing: making great music.

T Bone can find soul mates in the views of (he keeps coming up, doesn’t he?) Steve Jobs and Umair Haque.  Discussing his period of exile from Apple, Jobs said there was one fundamental cause of Apple’s problems under John Sculley: letting the desire for profits outweigh passion.

My passion has been to build an enduring company where people were motivated to make great products. The products, not the profits, were the motivation. Sculley flipped these priorities to where the goal was to make money. It’s a subtle difference, but it ends up meaning everything.
~ Steve Jobs

Umair Haque argues that business model innovation can be exactly the wrong thing to focus on, and stresses value creation over monetization.

Consider finance. Securitization was a breakthrough business model innovation for banks. Everything was remixed by everyone. Yet, toxic junk was mostly what was flowing through that new business model. Business model innovation amplified value destruction. Banks who didn’t play the securitization game — and stuck to simple, one-sided deposit-taking business models — are today’s survivors.

The reason monetization is a dirty word is simple. It blinds us to value creation, at the expense of value capture. When we seek to monetize, we end up chasing the same old lame competitive advantage. I win, you (and you, and you) lose. Put another way: “monetizing” toxic junk — from CDOs, to Hummers, to McMansions, to Big Macs – is how we got into this mess.

It is by rediscovering how to make stuff that’s not toxic junk in the first place that we’ll get out of the mess lame, evil, brain-dead 20th century thinking has left us in. That’s the challenge of a new generation of revolutionaries. And it’s not about new business models: it’s about reconceiving authentic, deep, value creation.
~ Umair Haque, “Why Ideals are the New Business Models” – HBR

Regardless of how you feel about Britney Spears, that might go a little too far.  There needs to be a balance between creating great music and earning a living.  From a musician’s perspective, there are two major challenges that can sometimes conflict:

1. Discovery – getting the music out there and connecting with fans

2. Compensation – finding a way to get fair payment to make a living and continue creating music

From here we will take a look at some of the new music business models being developed, with an emphasis on how they can contribute to improving discovery and compensation for artists.

{ 2 comments }

Survey still says: musicians have little love for Spotify

December 4, 2011

Spotify may be aiming to win the hearts and minds of app developers, but they still have some work to do when it comes to musicians.  We reported the early results of our Spotify survey here, and can now announce that the final results are…well, pretty much the same.  Once again: When asked how they [...]

Read the full article →

Google Music stays free – adds music store and artist pages

November 17, 2011

    Google just launched their music store in the US, and sent a message to Google Music beta users (excerpted below): Dear Music Beta user, We’re excited to announce that Music Beta by Google is officially graduating from beta today! Google Music will remain a free service, and you can continue to store up [...]

Read the full article →

Musicians’ Digital Performance Royalties at Risk

November 5, 2011

This guest post is from Kristin Thomson of the Future of Music Coalition. Recording artists and indie labels: there’s a movement afoot to change the way that you would receive your digital public performance royalties, and it’s not a good one, especially for recording artists. Back in August, we blogged about the news that Sirius/XM was [...]

Read the full article →

Music 2.0: Battle of the Business Models (part 2)

October 29, 2011

View the story “Music 2.0: Battle of the Business Models (part 2)” on Storify]

Read the full article →