Slashdot Mirror
Artists Strive To Wrest Rights From Music Industry
eldavojohn writes "The funny thing about the RIAA & BPI is that the artists are just as tired as the fans with how online music is being handled. So they're trying something new called the Featured Artists' Coalition. FAC's site states in their charter: 'We believe that all music artistes should control their destiny because ultimately it is their art and endeavors that create the pleasure and emotion enjoyed by so many.' As digital releases are increasing, the artists aren't seeing any more money. With the advent of online distribution, are the traditional music industry functions of promotion, samples, radio, and marketing now nothing but costly overhead for the artists? From Iron Maiden to Kate Nash to Radiohead, some big names are backing this new organization."
To stop the RIAA, everyone needs to hurt those that fund the RIAA.
These are the companies that need to be vilified.
- Sony
- EMI
- Universal
- Warner Brothers
Shocked indeed.
Unfortunately, there are far too many (largely former) artists, who would prefer to sit back and let the record labels pull in the money for them.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Here it is. The start of the final fall of the RIAA and its ilk.
The musicians and songwriters are revolting and refusing to be put in their place.
The only question remains: Will they re-do what the RIAA has done? Will they seek an iron-fist of control?
Keep your signature off their damn contract, and you can have all this right now. (That's assuming that you are, in addition to a musician, a marketing expert.)
It seems to me that for the FAC to serve the interests of the artists, there will need to be a legal arm for them. Furthermore, to even become famous, there needs to be some form of marketing and promotions for artists. Marketing and promotions is what the labels provide... in exchange for the souls of the artists.
Is the FAC prepared to provide this to its members? If so, then great... but is it really so different from what the Labels and RIAA provide? I suppose it remains to be seen... clearly, at least from the outside, it seems to favor artists more... for now.
FAC : RIAA == Manager : Pimp ?
One of the justifications I often hear for piracy is that you're revolting against record labels. Are people now saying that they will in fact stop pirating music if the RIAA isn't a factor?
Why do I have a hard time believing that?
They're promoters.
You don't need the record company to get your CDs made or your music distributed. You need the record company to get your song on the radio, to get your band on Leno or SNL, to get critics to listen to your stuff....
Being able to distribute your own music cheaply doesn't replace the record label - you still have to get anyone to want to listen to your music at all.
paintball
The thing is, there is a HUGE oversupply of "artists". There are way, way, way more people who want to be stars than there is a need for stars.
By comparison, there is much, much, much less money sitting around to turn one of the many people who want to be a star into an actual star.
The "artists" don't get much from the record company because if the "artist" isn't willing to take what the record company will give them, there is a long line of other people who will take it just to be famous.
The actual music is only one small part of the final product, and it's the most readily available.
paintball
Well, one should certainly expect repercussions for deviating from a contract, and one should consider not signing a contract they plan to deviate from. Just saying. Comparing the voluntary signature on an entertainment contract to slavery is pretty absurd.
Ok, how about this - if you ever release a work for public sale, then it must ALWAYS be available for public sale - no putting the genie back in the bottle.
If you want full control of your work, keep it to yourself.
What really irritates me is some corporate entity (or person, I suppose) who holds the rights to some body of work. I want it. Fred has an old original, and he wants a gazillion dollars for it on ebay. Martha has one in her attic, but forgot she has it. The corporation feels it is not worth their while to sell it to me, because it's only worth about five bucks, and it would cost them fifty to get it to me, so they just refuse to part with it.
Why should I not be able to get it at a reasonable cost? Fred is just unreasonable. Martha is just an unknown to me, I could never find her. The creator has long since given up the work, or lost interest. Why is this lost to ME? My only real option is to try to pirate it somewhere. I think once something (Intelectual Property, actually)is put up for sale, it should then forever be available - and if the copyright holder chooses to not make it available to me, then it should automatically fall into the public domain. Which it should do after a reasonable - REASONABLE (NOT practically-forever) amount of time anyway.
Just my 0.02
While its entirely unreasonable to compare an RIAA contract to slavery, I do think you're overstating the amount of voluntary choice that one has when signing these contracts. Simply put, many artists see a choice between giving in to the RIAA or languishing in obscurity forever. And, it is in the RIAA's interest to let such a situation continue. This is why these sorts of organizations (by the artists, for the artists) are to be welcomed.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
"If you don't sign here, there's a hundred bands who would kill for the opportunity - I'll just go find someone to replace you" My guess at what the quote would be, but it'd definitely something like that.
You mean the ones that have incorporated their own record labels in order to keep control over their life's work ?
Yeah, I'm sure they're soooo dependent on the two dozen middlemen that stand between their studios and their fans.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
In reality, that "big check" goes to the many people that handle the licensing. The artist gets, at most, a few pennies per play.
That's part of the problem: the system exists primarily to support itself, compensating the artists is a secondary objective.
I think radio stations are largely responsible for the great divide between those who collect royalties, and those who want/expect free music wherever they go. If you tune your car radio to WFKU-FM, you don't pay a penny (though the ads are obnoxious). If a restaurant plays music for its patrons, they're expected to pay licensing fees and/or subscribe to a commercial muzak service. Like many things in the music industry, the distinction was fabricated decades ago, and the business model is pretty much an exercise in hypocrisy.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Simply put, many artists see a choice between giving in to the RIAA or languishing in obscurity forever
To play devil's advocate, it seems the RIAA is providing a legitimate service then, doesn't it? Sign here and you will no longer languish in obscurity.
If this new artists coalition thingy can provide the same services, all the power to them. The industry needs competition, and if they can offer a better deal on the sign here to not languish part of the business, it's better for everyone.
DATABASE WOW WOW
Right now, for some pretty thin markets, I think 100% of the customers are online. Techno Trance, for example.
For more mainstream music, no, I don't believe anywhere near 100% are online, willing to spend money for music, or are able to download music quickly. When the CD section at WalMart closes down, then I will beileve that the music promotion business is no longer needed or useful. I have no idea what their demongraphics are, but I can guess that they are dial-up Internet users that are currently still spending money for music.
Most of the people I know haven't spent a dime on music in the last five years, will never spend a dime on it again and have high speed Internet connections. There is no possibility of selling them music ever again because they know how to download and where to download from.
Britney Spears is not an artist. She is an entertainer.
Each word is chosen based on very static definitions.