IFPI Won't Share Pirate Bay Damages With Musicians

An anonymous reader tips this news from TorrentFreak: Earlier this year the sentences against the Pirate Bay defendants were made final. Aside from prison sentences, they will have to pay damages to the entertainment industries, including €550,000 to several major music labels. The court awarded the damages to compensate artists and rightsholders for their losses. However, it now turns out that artists won’t see a penny of the money, as the labels have allocated it to IFPI to fund new anti-piracy campaigns. ...While it may come as no surprise that the music industry has a hard time getting money from The Pirate Bay defendants, what comes next may raise a few eyebrows. 'There is an agreement that any recovered funds will be paid to IFPI Sweden and IFPI London for use in future anti-piracy activities,' IFPI writes. In other words, the money that the Court awarded to compensate artists and rightsholders for their losses is not going to the artists at all."

Comments

well

[Trepidity]

This certainly comes as a huge surprise...

Humble Bundle for Music

[ElementOfDestruction]

Check out the current Humble Bundle: http://www.humblebundle.com/

FLAC Audio and DRM-Free, not a penny to the leeches! And if you think that the bands are too hippy, you can choose to send all of your money to the EFF who actively fight said leeches.

Re:Doesn't surprise me one bit

[houghi]

And it isn't that the general public doesn't hate them, they loathe them with a passion.

Even the artists hate them. To get money, they need to pay an annual fee. Many don't even get enough back to pay for that fee.
And I am talking about the songwriters and the music makers.
So they are double dipping. Charging the people they tend to get money for.

It used to be that a DJ had to send in his play list upfront and thus not be able to play anything else. If he did, he would be paying a fine.

Most companies don't have radio (which has commercials) in their offices anymore, because it is considered public music and they need to pay for it.
They are working on deals that companies need to pay, no matter what.

If I would be working for them, I would probably tel my friends I was selling meth to 10 year old school kids, because that would be considered as bad by my friends.

Re:the problem's not the labels or the customers..

[SpzToid]

"we call it Riding the Gravy Train."

• artist: Pink Floyd
• album: Wish you were here.
• song: Have A Cigar
• copyright: Warner/Chappell Music, Inc. (...according to lyricfreak.com)
• Label: Harvest, EMI (UK), Columbia, Capitol (US)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_a_Cigar

Not to the IFPA to decide

[dutchwhizzman]

The court explicitly declared that the money should go to the artists. If the artists decide it should be used for that, fine, but it should be going to the artists first. If they decide to give it to someone else for some other purpose, whatever, but not giving it to the artists is violating a direct court decision.

Re:Doesn't surprise me one bit

[devent]

That is really interesting. Here is some coverage: Music Royalty Society Collects Money For Fake Artists, Bathroom Equipment and Food