One Musician's Demand From Pandora: Mandatory Analytics

jfruh writes "Most Slashdotters have been following the debate among the various players in the music industry about how much money artists (and their labels) get from traditional music outlets like radio and newer services like Pandora or Spotify. But Zoë Keating, a professional cellist who has a professional interest in the outcome of this argument, thinks there's one thing missing from all the proposals: more data on who her audience is. Even digital services can't tell her how many people heard her songs or where they're most popular. 'How can I grow my business on this information?' she asks. 'How do I reach them? Do they know I'm performing nearby next month? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?'" She proposes mandatory reporting of information on listeners as part of royalties.

Comments

I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[Anonymous Coward]

although I'm moderately surprised that it doesn't already exist....wait - it exists. It must. Nevermind.
It just is being sold to people who have more to gain from this info than the actual artists themselves. Well....I guess is what those unions are for then huh?

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[MightyMartian]

Artists have a hard enough time getting royalties and accounting out of labels. Asking for statistics is shooting for the moon.

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course this data is already being reported, but in interest of consumer privacy a lot of data is obfuscated and sometimes the most detailed item about a person reported to labels and music rights bodies (those who in turn pay the artists) is zip code and state.

I work for a similar service (not Pandora) - as much is reported as is requested. If it is a question of what track is the most popular in what area - she is trying to put the onus on the wrong party here. If this record artist wants to know the age breakdowns of their music listeners - this is a request they need to put towards said royalty bodies.

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[iluvcapra]

Pandora and Spotify are just labels by a different name. They tweaked the business model, and the managers are careful to wear pocket protectors instead of sunglasses, but that's about it.

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[wonkey_monkey]

Pandora and Spotify are just labels by a different name.

How many musicians are signed to Pandora or Spotify?

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[somersault]

Maybe he means more along these lines? Spotify is part owned by the big labels. Artists get a pittance from Spotify, but seeing as it's 1) one of the the few legal ways to listen to lots of music without paying much, and 2) very convenient, it's what I use.

Re:I'd opt-in - but it needs to be an opt-in

[iluvcapra]

Not many musicians are "signed" to labels, and if there's only one Spotify, it's not like they need an exclusive contract, they're the only game in streaming.

They're just middlemen.

Whose Data Is It?

[sdoca]

The last line of the article is a quote from Zoe (emphasis mine):

“I want my data and in 2012 I see absolutely no reason why I shouldn’t own it,” she wrote.

Which begs the question in my mind, whose data is it? The stations' to whom listeners tune into and collect the data or the artists' whose music is played? I would argue its the stations as they're the ones collecting it.

Another question is what is the data? I don't listen to any satellite or internet radio stations so I could be wrong, but I suspect that in the case of internet radio you can get the number of feeds and their location but that's about it. Is there any listener data that can be collected by satellite? How can that data be used to help artists market themselves better?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Dahamma]

Yeah, bullshit HER data. I'm sure the data she gets on streams is much more accurate than any data on how many people heard a broadcast (which I would guess is near zero for a cellist) and still more interesting than CD sales data (since it tells her how many times each song has been played, not simply purchased).

If she wants to figure out her audience she can do it herself rather than try to demand a content provider invade anyone's privacy...

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's MY data. She got MY money in trade for the music. Is that not enough? Is this going to be another reason to drive people to piracy? She didn't get this kind of detailed information when her song was delivered over radio waves, why should she she demand my information now that it is over IP?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Doctor_Jest]

Exactly... well said. I don't understand how artists did it before the internet. I guess there weren't any successful artists before Pandora and the wealth of listener data that accompanies it.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[MidnightBrewer]

You got something in exchange for your money, so arguably the data is half hers. Also, the data she's requesting still leaves you anonymous, but would allow her to be able to know what age ranges like her music and what parts of the world. This would allow her to be a more successful artist by focusing her marketing efforts to those people who might actually pay to see her in concert, which eventually benefits you as she continues to make the music you enjoy. Everybody wins. Radio doesn't offer that kind of information, and as a result it always goes for the safe money (or the payola, as the case may be) and plays the music guaranteed to appeal to the largest majority of listeners. If you're listening to Pandora then it's likely because terrestrial radio has let you down in terms of selection. Exactly what are you fighting against here? Allowing people to give you what you want?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[TheLink]

Bullshit. Why should getting something in exchange for the money automatically mean the data is half hers?

She's got the data on whatever she has sold directly.

If she doesn't want to incur the costs of selling directly then why should she automatically get the benefits of selling directly to the customers?

The supermarket and grocery store knows who is buying their stuff and where. If the farmer wants to know where each tomato is going, the farmer is going to have to pay for it. Or set up his/her own store.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think she needs to be a little less entitled. It is the customer and merchants data. It is illegal to disclose it to third parties without customer consent.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[bistromath007]

This post, and the entire thread it's spawned, seems like a perfect example of what is fundamentally wrong with the idea of ownership of information. Something as very basic as "who wants this stuff" is information that would help every business and consumer in the entire chain if it were released publicly, but that doesn't happen, because every single business and consumer in the chain wrongly, stupidly, and greedily claims that it is theirs and nobody can use it if they don't get a cut. Nearly everyone involved in this industry works as hard as they can to screw themselves over, all because they want to be paid for something that literally everybody has a reasonable claim to.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

And I'm sure that if i were to demand her listening data that she would take the opposite side of the argument. If she really wants to get her information out to her listeners then she can set up a website, and ask that a link to that website be made available while her songs played. It's easy to imbed this data into MP3's and into internet radio streams, as well as just about any other digital media. What she is currently asking for is to basically spy on her users, so that she can optimize her profits.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[khallow]

It's apparent that she thinks it's her data because she would benefit from access to that data. Basically I should own something because I want it. I can't see how that rule could possibly be abused.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's certainly not hers and she needs to realise that.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

You got something in exchange for your money, so arguably the data is half hers.

She got money, I got music. There was no agreement to get my data. 0% is hers.

Also, the data she's requesting still leaves you anonymous, but would allow her to be able to know what age ranges like her music

Just age? Or my full birthday? How about my IP address? Or my real address? Or my credit card number? Does she get to say which information and where the line is drawn? Which "HALF" of MY data does she get exactly?

Exactly what are you fighting against here? Allowing people to give you what you want?

That just because I trade my money for something doesn't mean they can get my personal information "just because it's the internet".

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

You got something in exchange for your money, so arguably the data is half hers.

So that works both ways then by your logic? I should now have a right to request personal information from all musical artists so I can track them? I mean, their personal data is half mine now right?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[JasterBobaMereel]

No it does not help the customer who are in the majority ...if you sell 300 items then 300 people want them it does not matter who they are where they are, it only reduces your advertising costs as you can direct your adverts to people who are already buying your product (and leave out the people who are not buying now) !

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[AftanGustur]

You got something in exchange for your money, so arguably the data is half hers.

The data she is requesting was generated by my actions, it is a data about what I did. Just like the GPS data in your telephone represents your movements, and the event log in your PC tells what programs you ran and the browsing history what websites you visited. It is your data.

What we need is a law that states that metadata belongs to the person that generated it.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[bistromath007]

You need to complete this thought, guy. An independent artist with a quite limited travel budget is trying to figure out where to perform next. If she has data on where there are large numbers of her fans, she can have more successful shows, allowing her to put on more shows and continue creating, thus benefiting her fanbase. Successful artistry is not a parasitic relationship unless you're some kind of objectivist robot.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

What we need is a law that states that metadata belongs to the person that generated it.

Well first of all no we don't. Passing more laws is not the answer to every little problem or irritation you have in life.
Second, technically speaking the metadata was generated by the music service, not you.
Third, she can have my information. She'll find out that Butt H. Urt who lives at 6969 Phisting Drive in southern California is 42 years of age likes to listen to her music, as well as some heavy metal, pop, classical, and trance.
And finally, she does not have any rights to demand user information from the streaming services, just like she has no right to demand that ID be shown to purchase her albums in a brick and mortar store, and just like she doesn't get to have all the personal information from the people who attend her live shows. If she wants that to be part of the contract to stream her album or purchase a concert ticket then fine, if she can get the services and promoters to agree to that then she can have it. But she'll quickly find that many people don't want to divulge that information, and will simply move on to other artists and other forms of distribution which do not have those requirements.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

she could you know post on her website that she has limited travel budget and ask where fans want her to perform. and then 4chan will send her to alaska.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Mirvnillith]

The data she is requesting was generated by my actions, it is a data about what I did. Just like the GPS data in your telephone represents your movements, and the event log in your PC tells what programs you ran and the browsing history what websites you visited. It is your data.

I agree, if you are the only party involved. But this is an interaction, one producer and one consumer, so there must be "shared" data (or your statement wouldn't apply to the producer, rendering it invalid).

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Honest question: if I start a company selling this type of data to musicians, you would say that's wrong?
To me, it seems a legitimate business model: collecting the data does not sound like a free action.

To ponder: musicians created the music -- but someone else enabled distribution to listeners.
If you'd like to argue that the musicians should have free access to the benefits of the distributor's labour, then why shouldn't the distributor have free access to the musician's labour (i.e., the music)?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[rmstar]

âoeI want my data and in 2012 I see absolutely no reason why I shouldnâ(TM)t own it,â she wrote.

Which begs the question in my mind, whose data is it?

Who knows? Whoever feels entitled to it and manages to convince enough people for it?

In any case, it's the classic "that shit belongs to me or i'm going Galt" kind of entitlement.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

“I want my data and in 2012 I see absolutely no reason why I shouldn’t own it,” she wrote.

 

Good luck if you try doing business in Europe with that kind of attitude towards customer data.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Mitsoid]

I get a feeling her problem is along the lines of:

1) You paid money (or paid with eyes/ears on an advertisement) to listen to her song
2) She doesn't know you did so...

She's not getting "Money for you listening".. or at least, she has no way to know it.. Pandora doesn't tell her how many times her music was listened to... Being in a business.. it IS helpful to know exactly how many transactions you made to get your $500... or .. how many of what song was sold..

I agree with you.. She doesn't need my name, or birthday, or my financial information.... But if she wants to know I listened to Her Songs X, Y, and Z... and that I bought Her Song A.. She should, in my opinion, be able to get some kind of breakdown of that information (Here is $250, your songs were listened to by 20,000 people.. 240 bought the following songs:)

This data requires no data mining.. It's data Pandora already has and uses to pay her royalty... and the only cost is from writing the artist a semi-detailed receipt to go with her royalty check.. currently Pandora says "Here's $300, no.. you can't know how many times each song was listened to.. no.. you can't know how many songs people bought"

Great for us.. Great for Pandora... makes learning what we (the audience) like to listen to and buy impossible without getting the tainted groups of fanatics who seek the artist out on their own..

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Mitsoid]

Point to clarify:

When I say she should have access to my information, I mean in bulk --

E.g. "3000 people listened to song Y" -- the fact I, specifically, listened to it should not be included.. just general numbers of which I am included

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bit of an attitude problem, you have there. What a miserable and nasty person you are.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Culture20]

Another question is what is the data? I don't listen to any satellite or internet radio stations so I could be wrong, but I suspect that in the case of internet radio you can get the number of feeds and their location but that's about it. Is there any listener data that can be collected by satellite? How can that data be used to help artists market themselves better?

Users of Pandora sign up for the service, which allows them to create their own "stations" which are randomly generated groups of songs determined to be similar to the seed song or seed genre. For each individual song played, users can skip, thumbs up, or thumbs down (which also skips, but reduces the likelihood of replay). That's way more data than the old radio model with snail mail surveys.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Jumperalex]

So by that same logic, it benefits me when Company X learns everything about me so they can create a better Widget for me to buy? Because that is exactly what you just said. The only difference is that I've removed "artist" from the equation to acknowledge there is nothing special about an "artist" in this equation.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[SleazyRidr]

The farmer doesn't care where one particular tomato goes, just as the artist doesn't care who in particular was listening to her track. The farmer does know that he's selling a lot more tomatoes to stores in Austin than he sells to stores in Houston, so it would benefit him to make arrangements with warehouses (or something like that, I don't really know much about the logistics involved in tomatoes) closer to Austin than Houston. Similarly, the musician would like to know whether her track is being played more in Austin or Houston to decide if she should play her next concert in Austin or Houston.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Chris Mattern]

I don't understand how artists did it before the internet.

Radio station ratings and tracking album sales.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[omfgnosis]

I think responses like this are missing the forest for the trees in the idea being proposed here.

Let's take a step back. The context of the idea is a dying traditional music industry; most of the old business models are failing. In the old models, there were a number of large marketing and distribution networks who collected the sort of data Keating is asking for, and used that data to inform their marketing and distribution efforts. An organization in the business of successful music sales needs to know the size, makeup and geographical distribution of the audience. As those organizations become increasingly irrelevant, the capacity to make those informed decisions is to some extent decentralized, but also to a large extent in danger of vanishing entirely.

What Keating is asking of "internet radio" (Pandora being a major source of her exposure, but it is really a clarion call to the changing music industry) is to recognize the fact that artists are becoming more and more isolated and atomized, and to create a business model that represents that. If any of the businesses currently "in the game" want to be relevant, they'll allow artists (to the extent they're motivated and willing) to act as their own respective businesses, and do a lot of the work that the old marketing and distribution channels no longer can or want to do.

And it really is a gift to the industry players to publicize the idea this way. The alternative is to build the new model in relative obscurity, grow it and supplant the current players. The idea is about more than data, but that data is central to its success. The real idea, at its core, is that the new model (and she touches on this in her blog post) requires a great deal more individual initiative on the part of artists. And whatever you may think about "whose data is it?" and the fairness of the request, a music industry can't survive if artists fail. A successful, modern music industry would help to foster all of that atomized effort in a productive way. And isn't that, basically, what most of us have been asking for since we saw the writing on the wall for old music business?

Keating and other enterprising artists want a venue to reach their fans. They don't just want this, they require it for commercial success. We, as music fans, require the artists' success for our lives to be enriched by the music. A team of enterprising developers could provide this in a relatively short time (relative, at least, to the pace of the old industry's death), and pretty much steal the show. As Keating says, the new model is supposed to be peripheral sales, the music being the driving force behind those sales. Providing what Keating has asked for is not a concession, it's a recipe for success.

As an artist myself, I've imagined creating a tool of this nature. It's not enough to have a place to upload music files and artwork. It's not even enough to have a couple of form fields to link to the artist's blog. A lot of the elements of a powerful new business model already exist, but they're woefully unintegrated. What artists and fans alike need is a way for everyone to get connected, in a very distinct way from the existing social networks. Artists are businesses in this model, and anyone who empowers them to act in that capacity stands to win the day. And I think we'd all be better off for it.

As a developer, I'm unfortunately indisposed with other work too important to me to pursue a business like this, but I thought it would be helpful to share this perspective in case other developers are reading and want to create the next big thing in music. That thing is: create the tools that artists need to reach their audience. Giving them data lets them adjust their own marketing efforts, their own performance efforts, their own merchandise efforts. Everything else is icing on the cake. These tools are force multipliers, and the more you can accommodate those efforts, the more artists will succeed and the more they'll choose your service. And fans will follow, not just because that's where the music is heading, but also because that service would provide more of what fans want too. Why would I choose the noise of "radio" when there's something better?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should getting something in exchange for the money automatically mean the data is half hers?

Because it is a double two-way transaction. Both parties must necessarily know something about the other party.

You beg the question: "Would you like to participate in a marketplace where neither the buyer nor seller know anything about the transaction?"

If you answer "No" you must be willing to accept that in the method of transaction we're accustomed to information is exchanged (or generated/extrapolated). If you answer "Yes" you are not demonstrating reason.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[TheLink]

The farmer does know that he's selling a lot more tomatoes to stores in Austin than he sells to stores in Houston

If the farmer only sold and delivered to a single place that's all that farmer would know. Same goes for the musician.

She may be entitled to the info on her transactions. But she is not entitled to info on other people's transactions.

So if this musician wants to know more details she should:
1) find a store that is willing to tell her (whether for free or for compensation)
2) sell to different stores
3) sell directly
4) do a survey

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[TheLink]

Perhaps. I hope to improve eventually.

As for miserable and nasty. Well I'm sorry if saying something is bullshit made you sad or upset.

Perhaps you can suggest an accurate replacement word?

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not paying the artist. I'm paying the delivery service.
They know enough about me to be able to get me what I am paying for. I know enough about them to send them payment.
That's all you need.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Radio station ratings = polling people asking their views. Not the same thing.
Tracking album sales = seller (not her) keeps receipts. Not the same thing.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Draknor]

In broad strokes, yes.

I've seen Zoe in concert -- she's pretty awesome! I would like to see her again. But I'm a busy guy, and "sign up on Zoe's website for tour news" usually doesn't bubble up very high on my priority list. If I see a banner or promo flyer, however, I'm more likely to make note of it and maybe actually put it in my calendar to attend. If she knows there's a lot of others listening to her in my region, then she's more likely to schedule another concert here, and do more marketing here. I have no problem with her (& other artists) using anonymized data to help regionally target their sales & marketing.

Likewise, many (paid) apps I install now ask me to submit "anonymous usage data" to help them improve their product. I usually agree to do this, under the assumption that the data is actually anonymous, and that by me giving them feedback, they can make a product that I will find more useful & more appealing. I like programs that work they way I think they should work -- that are intuitive to me, and I'm willing to give up some data about my usage in exchange for that potential.

What I DON'T like is companies that harvest personal, non-anonymous information about me, and then sell that to other companies that I have not expressed interest in. I get flyers in the mail for "Skillpath Seminars", addressed to my small business name. I never attended a Skillpath Seminar under my small business name, nor do I recall ever signing up or purchasing a leadership/management product for my small business that would be relevant to Skillpath. So that means some OTHER vendor I used compiled a list that Skillpath purchased and cold-called (mailed) me. That's not effective for me; in fact, it's irritating because it's more mail I have to sift through & dispose of.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Still a silly and unrelated argument. The farmer doesn't need to sell anything except his produce. The farmer has no need to market directly to the consumer because the consumer will never go directly to the farmer for anything. The farmer isn't going to open a stand to sell in a particular area and compete with the store he sold to in the first place. There is no point this analogy makes any sense.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[mcgrew]

I don't understand how artists did it before the internet.

They didn't. The internet changed everything. Before the internet, either a record label signed you (and usually ripped you off) or you played in bars. The record companies had all the data; they knew how many copies of whom was selling where, and who was playing whom on the radio and where.

If your label liked you they might illegally pay radio stations to play your stuff. If they didn't, they either didn't renew your contract or simply didn't ship much product.

Before the internet, musicians were dependant on the labels. When Roger McGuinn, front man for the hit record selling band The Byrds got too old (in the eyes of the label) his career crashed hard. He played in bars and other low-paying places... until Napster came along with P2P, when a new generation of listeners revived his dead career. Now it's the labels who are floundering; nobody needs them any more.

"To everything there is a season... a time to live, a time to die."

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://begthequestion.info/

Give it up. Language, especially idiomatic language, moves on. The prescriptivist side lost this war years ago. The more intuitive interpretation of this phrase won, and sadly for you, it wasn't the interpretation you prefer.

Perhaps you should expend your efforts elsewhere. If you're a fan of lost causes, I hear some people are still trying to promulgate a distinction between "hacker" and "cracker".

This is different than most cases - the true meaning of beg the question is a unique philosophical/logical fallacy. It is being lost.

"Hacker" and "cracker" is semantics, the idea of "white" and "black" hats remains. "Beg the question" is something that there is no easy alternative to, and as such misusing the term undermines societal understanding of logical fallacies (which is already tenuous at best).

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

And I should add that using it to mean "raise the question" is really not more intuitive - the phrase "raise the question" is in fact the intuitive way to express that meaning. Using "beg the question" instead just projects needy pseudo-intellectualism, ironic due to the actual misuse.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Kim0]

Data is not owned.
Data is known.

In practice, but not in legal theory.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not hers to demand. She has a contract I presume with Pandora (ie the middle man) I make a contract with Pandora. I never make a contract with her.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

None of this is YOUR data. You gave it to Pandora in exchange to listen to a song. You made that decision, the end. The data is Pandora's. The question isn't whether she should have YOUR data, it's whether Pandora should allow her access to the data that Pandora has about you in exchange for her music, which Pandora is using to get you to their site.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[mcgrew]

That's way more data than the old radio model with snail mail surveys.

No, the data they got in the old days was "how many stations are playing this song, and how often" and "how many people are buying this record, and where."

The surveys (Nielson, etc) came up with metrics for the stations, not the labels.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[gnapster]

(+1, Poignant quote)

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Begs the question" really isn't a very good name for the fallacy, and it is trivially replaced with a more descriptive, intuitive term like "presuming the argument".

For better or worse, the ship has sailed on "begging the question". I used be on the prescriptivist side of the argument and then realized how counterintuitive it was for most people. It's more pragmatic to use a new, unambiguous and descriptive term for the fallacy when attempting to educate the uninformed.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[loneDreamer]

SIGH, Things were so simple when whoever HAD the data was the owner of it...

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[chrismcb]

She didn't get this kind of detailed information when her song was delivered over radio waves, why should she she demand my information now that it is over IP?

Yes she did. Or something close to it. You don't think marketers have an understanding of the demographic of a particular radio station? Data from Pandora would be a bit more accurate though.
And it isn't YOUR data, it is data Pandora collected. She is asking how many times her music played, how many people listened to it, where is it more popular. These are all things you can get from broadcast industry today.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[chrismcb]

Just age? Or my full birthday? How about my IP address? Or my real address? Or my credit card number? Does she get to say which information and where the line is drawn? Which "HALF" of MY data does she get exactly?

She is asking for (at least per the article)
How many times her song played. This isn't about YOU, this is more about an agreement with Pandora. Radio stations have this data.
How many people heard it. Again, not about YOU, but more an agreement with Pandora. Radio stations can guess this data.
Where is it most popular. While she didn't explicitly say she wants an ip address I'm sure she would be happy with geographic locations (such as city, state, country). Maybe it will help her plan her next tour.
Nothing she asks is about YOU. Some of it is already required by other companies (like the # of plays)
Does she want some info on you? I bet, I bet she'd like to have some demographic info. What is the average age of her listeners, age brackets and so on. But that would only happen if Pandora collects that data.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[chrismcb]

Yeah, bullshit HER data. I'm sure the data she gets on streams is much more accurate

According to the article, it IS NOT more accurate. And that is her point. It doesn't sound like she wants to invade anyones privacy. She just wants to get the data that the local broadcast radio station got for her... you know like before the internet.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[chrismcb]

No it does not help the customer who are in the majority ..

How does it not help the customer? Maybe she is trying to decide on where to tour next? Maybe she is trying to decide on what songs to write/sing next? Both of these can help the customer.
Keep in mind, she didn't sell 300 items. She gave one to Pandora to play, and now she doesn't know how many she "sold"

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[chrismcb]

So by that same logic, it benefits me when Company X learns everything about me so they can create a better Widget for me to buy?

In some sense yes. Except they won't know ANYTHING about you, other than you bought a widget. And when the next widget comes out, that makes your job easier, there is a chance you might want it.The benefit because they make more money, you benefit because you have a better widget. Or in an artist case more good stuff from an artist you enjoy.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Dahamma]

Yes, this is the core of it. Did her contract include a right to this data (and did the TOS for the Pandora use include the fact their data could be used for this)? Then she should get it. If it didn't she shouldn't get it.

I'm sure (after whatever term expires) she can attempt to renegotiate the contract with Pandora. But good luck, I seriously doubt they are interested in changing their TOS and negotiating a unique contract with an unknown cellist that makes up about 0.0000000000001% of their streaming.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Dahamma]

Well, that's not really the issue here. As far as I know artists already know how many times they are streamed, since they get royalties based on that.

The point of this article is she wanted demographic information (geographical region, age, etc) and assuming Pandora didn't include that in her royalty contract, there's just no reason she should feel entitled to it.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Dahamma]

No, but privacy laws would generally prohibit Pandora giving this data to anyone unless you agreed to it (usually via a giant unreadable TOS, but still, they need to go through the motions first...)

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[TheLink]

The farmer has no need to market directly to the consumer because the consumer will never go directly to the farmer for anything.

Never? There are many farmers and people who buy directly from them. http://www.localharvest.org/

So if you bother to think a bit more on why the OTHER farmers don't sell directly to the people who actually consume their products you will understand my argument better. Hint- it usually costs more. Rather than selling a huge amount at once you have to do many times the work by selling to each individual customer. But you get your data.

Those organic farmers do get their data. They might even be able to get useful feedback directly from their customers (changes in the quality etc).

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[mcrbids]

But asking for "a cut" is the heart and soul of economics: it's the means by which available resources are allocated and exchanged. If something is valuable, it will have a cost to acquire. It's how economics works, and it really sucks badly; it just sucks less than anything else we've cooked up so far.

There's some movement now underway in the Internet-based digital economy in the area of cooperative trust enabled by digital technology but it's not yet proven enough to be more than a fad. What this "cooperative trust" model might mean for data is anybody's guess. Give it 10 years, and then it will be something we can start to rely on.

Until then, sadly, the old rules based on ownership still have merit, because they've worked for thousands of years.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Anonymous Coward]

every musician i like has my name on their mailing list and email me advance notice of when their playing in my area. zoe can do this too, and screww the analytics

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Jumperalex]

So if they don't "know ANYTHING about [me]" then exactly what are we talking about? What data is being used to make this widget / art better "for me".

You specify "where there are large numbers of fans" but that isn't all she is asking for. Whats more, the attitude that it is "her data" breeds the idea that she is 1) entitled to it and 2) implies that there is more than just 'fan location data' she feels entiteled to. I personally disagree and since it is MY data, and MY relationship with the retailer, not hers. In fact, I might intentionally choose a retailer based on their attitude about collecting data about me (read: they don't and when/if they do they don't share it).

I honestly do get her / your point about customer feedback and info being very useful for a business. But lately the attitude about their "right" to the data is just getting annoying and I for one am not willing to just accept it. Resistance may be futile, but I will still resist.

Re:Whose Data Is It?

[Jumperalex]

"In broad strokes yes" ... the point about my analogy is that OP says that it is not some parasitic relationship. She wants data to help better sell her product. That is fine, but don't sell it as some altruistic attempt to help the customer. It is a business trying to improve their targeted marketing. Call it what it is, and suddenly it doesn't sound quite so innocuous. At least to me it doesn't.

But the galling part about it, because I agree fully anonymous data is fine with me, is her attitude that it is "her data". It is NOT her data. It is the retailers and it is mine.

I think not

[SSpade]

Geographic distribution and some basic demographics is one thing, and quite a reasonable one, but combine "How do I reach them? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?" and “I want my data and in 2012 I see absolutely no reason why I shouldn’t own it.” and it sounds like the worst sort of stalkery marketer who'll abuse the hell out of your personal information for a buck.

Re:I think not

[dbc]

Sure, I see your point. But for certain artists I would like to be able to opt-in to show announcements. Or get a summary. Like, how about a personalized calendar that shows the dates for nearby shows for the list of artists I select? I get a calendar, and artists get anonymized numbers about where and how many people have added them to their calendar.

Re:I think not

[Jafafa Hots]

Not necessarily.
Think about YouTube analytics.

I find out that certain videos are a hit with certain blogs, that's where my traffic comes from. So I make sure to give them more of what they want, PLUS I struck up a relationship of sorts with the blog owners which is mutually beneficial.

I let them know when I have new content, which helps them. They give me a wider platform, info that helps me learn the subculture, etc.

I am NOT a networker kind of person, I'm a "do every last thing yourself" kind of person, but analytics let you know when you're wasting your time, let you know where your "friends" and compatriots are, etc.

For a musician, it could even help them know what cities they might try booking an appearance in, because they discover they have a fan base there.

Re:I think not

[girlintraining]

it sounds like the worst sort of stalkery marketer who'll abuse the hell out of your personal information for a buck.

Whoa there partner, back up. What this artist is asking for is entirely reasonable because this information is already available to the distributor. And offering additional information from the artist like when and where shows are happening is not only reasonable but the main method by which independent artists make their money! Radio was given free license to air music precisely because air time led to increased ticket sales, and they're very pro-active about announcing concerts that are coming up; It's typically part of the contract.

This person isn't asking for the personal details of every listener, but rather information on when and where those listeners are -- something that would be needed to audit the distributor and ensure their contractual agreement is being upheld, and something that a court order would easily be granted for. And it's just good business anyway. There's nothing "stalkery" about this. Or would you prefer the artist take it on faith that the distributor isn't screwing them over? As I understand it, there's something of a commotion over contractual obligations of certain 4-letter acronym'd agencies that often talk about "artists' rights", though they afford none to those who sign contracts with them. Shouldn't we be wanting the industry to be moving away from this kind of vendor lock-in?

Re:I think not

[artor3]

There is a way to let the artist reach the user without infringing on the user's rights. Right now, the webpage displays info on the artist. You can reach that same info by clicking on the band's name in the desktop app. Just let artists add a couple sentences to their bio page. Something like "We have a new album called XXX coming out on YYY! Be sure to check it out!"

Problem solved. People who want to learn more about the artist can get the info, people who don't care don't get ads shoved in their face. I don't know if Ms. Keating would be satisfied with that arrangement, but anything more than that would probably leave me reconsidering my subscription.

Re:I think not

[Canie]

I occasionally read a comment and if I learned something or just plain liked it I'll take a look to see who wrote it. Frequently it's girlintraining. I like the what you bring to /.

Re:I think not

[DarwinSurvivor]

You do know that 99.99% of artists have websites right?

Re:I think not

[SSpade]

What this artist is asking for is entirely reasonable because this information is already available to the distributor.

Also available to the distributor is all the information about the other artists you listen to. And your zip code, your email address, your age. Possibly, depending on what sort of account you have, your home address and your credit card number. I'm pretty sure that she wouldn't ask for your credit card number, but I'm sure she'd love to have your email address.

Re:I think not

[MidnightBrewer]

I disagree. She says that she wants "her" data, but she's talking about basic demographics and geographic distribution. There are plenty of automated, autonomous ways for Pandora et al to help her reach you without her ever knowing who exactly you are. If the data tells her that all of her fans are located in San Francisco, then she would be wasting time and money holding a concert in Cincinnati, and vice-versa. She then takes out a TV ad, a billboard or a newspaper ad saying that she'll be in the area for a concert and her fans can then buy tickets. Everybody wins. I don't see the problem with this.

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

but analytics let you know when you're wasting your time

So you are a networker. You're doing things that will bring you fame, rather than things that are true to what you believe.

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

The request for data is reasonable, the artists attitude is not. Calling it her data and that she should "own" it is what makes her wrong. It is the typical attitude of artists. They are afforded by the people an incredibly generous term of copyright, but that is not enough for her. Everything that is touched by that creation is now hers.

It is this kind of attitude that will lead to her living to see the end of such monopolies. Copyright is not a basic right of man.

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

The solution to the problem would be to allow the artist to BUY an ad that is displayed when someone listens to their music.She wants to know how to grow her business. The answer is to pay for advertising like every other business in existence.

Re:I think not

[gl4ss]

Not necessarily.
Think about YouTube analytics.

I find out that certain videos are a hit with certain blogs, that's where my traffic comes from. So I make sure to give them more of what they want, PLUS I struck up a relationship of sorts with the blog owners which is mutually beneficial.

I let them know when I have new content, which helps them. They give me a wider platform, info that helps me learn the subculture, etc.

I am NOT a networker kind of person, I'm a "do every last thing yourself" kind of person, but analytics let you know when you're wasting your time, let you know where your "friends" and compatriots are, etc.

For a musician, it could even help them know what cities they might try booking an appearance in, because they discover they have a fan base there.

so she should get a fb page.
btw. networking with blog owners and people who bring you traffic sure as fuck sounds like "networking".

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

effort

Re:I think not

[Jafafa Hots]

No.

I am not chasing fame. I post everything anonymously, with a creative commons license.

I am chasing INFORMING people. I am chasing adding to the body of human knowledge in my extremely modest way. I am chasing pleasing people. I am chasing putting something out there that people find inspiring or engaging or fun or cool.

Anonymously.

Because I too like fun, cool, inspiring things and appreciate when others put them out there.

I am chasing GIVING BACK.

Re:I think not

[Jafafa Hots]

There's a lot of contempt for her in your response.
Makes me question your motives.

I'm networking? If you can call using analytics networking.
If you can call not ONE of the half of a million people who have watched my videos and not ONE of the blog owners knowing my name or who I am "networking."

If you can call me spending my own money to create things and give them all away free, anonymously, "networking."

Personally I just call it "using available data to see what people appreciate."

Re:I think not

[acidream]

Not exactly what you are talking about, but last.fm has something that tells you if the artist you are listening to is on tour and provides show dates.

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

So go and subscribe to her newsletter.

Re:I think not

[dbIII]

Just a couple of posts above yours is one that shows how badly you've missed the point.
Bistromath wrote:

An independent artist with a quite limited travel budget is trying to figure out where to perform next.

If a touring musician doesn't know they have fans in Sunnydale C.A. for instance they won't be booking the Bronze for a gig.

Re:I think not

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a lot of contempt for her in your response.

I don't see it, but I'm sure she deserves it. She does not own the data just because she wants it and it would make her money; that is a contemptible and childish attitude.

Re:I think not

[NJRoadfan]

I suppose you communicate with other folks on youtube too. I had someone actually influence the stats of one of my videos by telling everyone to skip to a certain point in the comments.

Re:I think not

[tompaulco]

"How do I reach them? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?" and “I want my data and in 2012 I see absolutely no reason why I shouldn’t own it.”
This is a simple problem to solve. Just advertise on Pandora. In fact, you can advertise whenever your own song is played. So every time your song is played, you get X for the play and you pay them X+profit for the advertisement. Feel better now?

Re:I think not

[Draknor]

Yes, you are networking. But there's nothing WRONG with that!

"Networking" is just "communicating" -- you are communicating with people (such as blog owners). In this case, your goal is growing your audience, not growing your business or profit. That's fine -- there's nothing WRONG with networking. There's nothing wrong with growing your audience. And I'd also argue there's nothing wrong with growing a business or increasing your profit, if that's what you wanted to do.

Networking seems to get a bad rap when it's sleazy companies selling lists back & forth, looking for new fools to sell their crap too. But it's not networking that's bad, it's being sleazy & selling crap.

Personally, I think if you've got something valuable to offer, and you use networking connections to find the right audience who WANTS what you have -- that's exactly how networking (& capitalism) is SUPPOSED to work. When a blogger I trust & follow suggests something, it's likely
to be something I might be interested in. When I do a google search and find results on squidoo, I run away because 99% of the time, it's sleazy content filled with affiliate links written by people with no real value to offer.

Re:I think not

[Draknor]

I think the artist's attitude is very reasonable -- consider what Zoe wrote:

* Over 90% of my internet radio royalties are from Pandora.
* There is hardly any data. None of the laws require any entity to tell me how many performances I had, and so no one does. It’s nice to know how much money I made, but where did it come from? How can I grow my business on this information?

She recognizes that the business model for music is changing, but the old laws give her the old currency (money), not the new currency (information), and she needs that new currency to build her business. It's not about copyright & artist greed -- she just wants to be paid in the new currency, esp since the old currency isn't very valuable ($1652 for 1.5 million plays on Pandora in the first half of 2012). Pandora already has this information, they just don't give it to the artists, and Zoe wants that to change.

Re:I think not

[Jafafa Hots]

Actually I agree.
Networking can be organizing a charity, or it can be selling Amway.

When I say I am not a networker and am more of a "do everything yourself" person, I am not claiming that as a virtue, far from it. Being a "do everything yourself" person is my main character FLAW. It's just that I recognize that in myself.

Most of my projects end in failure for precisely that reason - I CAN'T do everything myself. Almost nobody can.

The cat is out...

[c0lo]

'How can I grow my business on this information?' she asks. 'How do I reach them? Do they know I'm performing nearby next month? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?'"

I guess the cat is out of the Pandora's box, eh? Well, let's see what else is in there...

(look what a fool's hope remained locked...) you want that info about me, drop your prices.
Oh... is it free already? Then... what about starting to pay me for my data?

(grin)

Re:The cat is out...

[T Murphy]

You realize this is between the artist and Pandora, Pandora already has your data. They aren't asking anything else from you.

What right does she have...

[Zemran]

... to my information? I want to keep my right to privacy and although I accept that she can ask, she does not have a right to it.

Re:What right does she have...

[geekoid]

Because she has a business. and having a business gives you the right to demand and get whatever you want, otherwise 'SOCIALISM!'

How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy ads like everyone else?

Here's an idea you can monetize

[Anonymous Coward]

Step 1: Be an obnoxious prick and demand things for nothing
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Eat shit and die.

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[MidnightBrewer]

Yeah, darn those people who listen to internet radio for free!

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[Anonymous Coward]

hehe myspace ftw

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there are no ads in radio, in fact, the song themselves aren't ads at all.

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[Extremus]

For free?! I give back to Pandora a lot of "packet received" packets.

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has a patent on that.

Re:Here's an idea you can monetize

[Anonymous Coward]

Step 2: open wide.

So?

[lennier1]

Wouldn't market research like that be in their own best interest anyway?

Re:So?

[Plammox]

No. I don't necessarily want more of the same. Why would I want to be locked in one specific musical genre? I want to explore entirely new directions and be inspired. Targeted marketing would reduce the scope of new music, based on the marketeer's opinion of what I should like. Well guess what, I like Slipknot, Burt Bacharach, Louis Armstrong, electro-house, J.S. Bach, Bulgarian folk music and obscure Scandinavian jazz artists.

Fit that into your marketing DB, mr. Marketing Person. (not at you, OP)

Make an example of her...

[future assassin]

thow her the fuck out. With out exposure she'll have nothing, let her run her own website and gather those stats. The only things pandora should give out is the basic stats on how much the copyright owner should get paid past that they can PAY Pandora to get more stats.

Re:Make an example of her...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like this.

User data can be found easily by a company that sells stuff. They log all kinds of crap about you, and it's not illegal. If it's not illegal, then it's legal, meaning the data can be sold or bought. After that, it's simply a matter of negociating the services provided, like royalties and other things like the stats. She can pay for it, because the data belongs to the collector, not her.

The problem ... a website doesn't need to log anything about it's users. Never. They can make things easier, for the user, by providing them with a username and password, to see their buy history, but other than that ... there should be no reason to use real name, to store country, language, gender or age. Still, most of the time, you don't have a choice, or worse, get tricked into it.

If the artist really wants to get to know their userbase, then it's a simple matter of launching a blog and facebook page. It doesn't take long to setup or maintain.

I worked for a distributor of Colgate-Palmolive products for a few years. And in exchange for data about the firms we delivered goods to (like size, quantity bought, all from our records, not something given by those firms), we got slightly bigger discount.

Re:Make an example of her...

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like she's thinking about it from her perspective of what streaming music services like Spotify or Pandora are doing. They are already collecting this information and keeping it to themselves. They use it for the Music Genome project to help predict what kind of music a person might like to build those dynamic "stations" they have. As part of it a user clicks if they like, dislike or want to skip a track. They also track searches for songs/albums/artists etc. The users sign up and tell the streaming service info like their age and gender too.

I see it as a bigger part of the royalties argument, the streaming services are making money through ads and quite likely selling those customer metrics. Especially on Spotify which now requires Facebook integration to sign up.

She just wants general customer metrics, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me, but I suspect the streaming services won't give them to her, they might sell them to her.

I imagine it's quite frustrating when royalties made from having your music streamed are rather pathetic anyway. As far as letting fans know when you have a show coming, it could work just like last.fm where artists have pages with concert info and links to their web sites. If streaming services gave up this data, I bet artists would be a lot less upset about the bad royalty agreements they have from their labels.

Not to mention a more obtuse form of these metrics are generated by SoundScan and the other music ranking systems who's names I can't remember.

Re:Make an example of her...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're an idiot.

She already has her own site, over a million twitter followers, and is able to make a comfortable living off her music. She generates her own exposure and always has. Pandora and other streaming services account for less than 1% of her income. Do you get that this somebody who has, literally, built up everything they have from the ground up, with almost no help. She doesn't *need* the money or exposure from streaming services.

Do you also understand that she is just asking for data that Pandora is already collecting, sharing with advertising firms?

Re:Make an example of her...

[future assassin]

Apparently you and her don't realize that past the payment they make for her work they don't have to give her anything else. If she wants those stats and the customers say its ok then she can pay for the data or is that not fair? She should be allowed to have it for free and not pay for it.

Google.

[vovick]

How do I reach them? Do they know I'm performing nearby next month? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?

They can look you up if they like your performance on the radio. If they like it, they can look you up and probably subscribe to your RSS feed with all your new updates. If they are not doing so, they don't like you and your songs. Duh.

Re:Google.

[MidnightBrewer]

Unless you want to see her live in concert and she never plans one in your area because she had no idea that people in Podunk, Vermont are dying to see her perform live. Also, although RSS is awesome, it's a really crappy medium for listening to music. Being text and all. Just sayin'.

Re:Google.

[vovick]

Also, although RSS is awesome, it's a really crappy medium for listening to music

I have no idea what you are talking about. If you liked an artist's performance, you can google their site where you can find out where to buy their music (or donate) and subscribe to all the latest news (RSS, email). This is all I was saying. The radio played your song and gave your name, this is all that is needed to the listener to reach you. You can ask the radio station to provide a direct link to your site, but this is as far as common sense goes in terms of shoving your name into listeners' throats.

she never plans one in your area because she had no idea that people in Podunk, Vermont are dying to see her perform live

Valid argument. However, there is absolutely no need for forcing radio station to do this. People will write you mails asking if you will be performing in their town. You can create a form for people interested in your performance on your site asking them to provide their location. You can gather information from your official forum if you set one. If you are too much of a stalker, you can track visitors' IPs on your site and see places where you are popular the most. Heck, there are lots of ways of collecting this data, and none of them involves stalking people who don't care about you and your music and just happened to listen to the radio when your song was playing.

Re:Google.

[alexgieg]

They can look you up if they like your performance on the radio. If they like it, they can look you up and probably subscribe to your RSS feed with all your new updates. If they are not doing so, they don't like you and your songs. Duh.

This is valid for, let's call them "professional listeners", people who absolutely love music and actively go after it. But there are others like me, however, people we could call "middle-of-the-road listeners", who aren't that active, but would enjoy having their listening habit (that they themselves don't know they have) tapped onto. For instance, now and then it amazes me to discover that I actually like a certain singer or band quite a lot when I reflect at my own listening activity. And I didn't even know, or cared about, their name until that point. It wouldn't annoy me in the last, thus, if the singer/band were to discover me "before" I (consciously) "discovered" them (supposing I ever did).

The tricky part is doing this in a non-intrusive/non-creepy way. But if they could manage it, more power to them.

Re:Google.

[Anonymous Coward]

You should let Coca-Cola know they can stop advertising now.

Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[eldavojohn]

Oddly enough the first and only place I've heard of this artist is bandcamp and I think she's helped it grow. She seems to be demanding Pandora put in all the nice things that Bandcamp has.

Bandcamp is not a radio streaming station but you can stream a lot of albums freely on it. Bandcamp seems to solve a lot of these problems with it's pricing clearly stated. I don't use it as a musician but I make a lot of music purchases there and this is how things work. If you want to get an album for free, the band has the option of asking at least for your e-mail address and zip code. That way they can geographically target you or let you know they have a new album on Bandcamp. On top of that I think the sites has a huge stats dashboard for artists -- even including the referral URLs from which your listeners are landing on your page (so if you have it hooked up to your band's page, you can differentiate that from someone who found it via pitchfork or something).

I've had really good experiences with bandcamp but their 'discover' methodologies still leave a lot to be desired and I hope that someday they just turn it into a station that has a great front end that will allow you to see and purchase whatever is playing.

Of course, there's a lot of terrible music on bandcamp but I sort of enjoy the idea that it's open to all (as opposed to, say, Magnatune). There are famous artists that I already loved on Bandcamp and total nobodies I've come to adore.

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhhh... I get it now !! the purpose of the OP was so this shill for Bandcamp could be posted.... do you think you said the name enough times ? come on i am sure you could have inserted it at least another dozen times in there. :D

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

She's actually pretty big - I have three of her albums, and I don't use Pandora, Spotify, or bandcamp.

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Ginger Unicorn]

This one time, at Bandcamp, I kept saying Bandcamp over and over and over... ...P.S. BANDCAMP

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

This one time, at Bandcamp, I kept saying Bandcamp over and over and over... ...P.S. BANDCAMP

Oh god, that's so funny, this joke is so fucking fresh. Do you work at SNL?

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Ginger Unicorn]

Thanks, I'm glad you've enjoyed my hard work.

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[Anonymous Coward]

She's actually pretty big

That's really mean! Society is just forcing an unreasonable body image upon you.

Re:Bandcamp Seems Like More Her Thing

[phorm]

Or maybe he just likes the service. There are only so many solutions out there. I hadn't heard of bandcamp until more recently when I found some of Zircon's stuff there, but they're got some decent artists.

out of touch with fans

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a musician who's out of touch with her fans.

Re:out of touch with fans

[gl4ss]

There's a musician who's out of touch with her fans.

that's whats she's bitching about. though she doesn't know if she as fans or not.

Re:out of touch with fans

[Anonymous Coward]

You trolls here are ridiculous.

Zoe talks to her fans every, on Facebook, Twitter, you name it. She's one of the sweet people ever. And she does not feel "entitled" to anything. She only wants the aggregate listener data (which you have already agreed to share by using Pandora, see Pandora's EULA) so she can know where she has more fans, and also whether those services are actually paying her correctly.

This is a negotiation. Nobody feels "entitled". Do you understand how legislation works? It's a push-pull, give-take. each party wants something. That's how any kind of negotiation, and any kind of legislation, always works.

She is able to live comfortably off of the music she has made, sells, performs, and self-markets. Yeah... I think she's doing all right. No "bitching" is being done. Only a reasonable request by an already successful musician.

what privacy?

[Isara]

your listening data is already being collected. She may or may not be asking for listener email addresses, but if not, the statistics on your likes and dislikes and other listening patterns are part of the music genome project anyway. How would the artists' ability to view your listening patterns (without identifying you specifically) violate any right to privacy that isn't already given up as part of your agreement when creating an account to use the service?

Re:what privacy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Pandora's agreement may or may not include giving certain information to third parties under certain circumstances. What if your bank started handing out your personal information to some arbitrary people? Would you say it's all good and fair because you gave your information to the bank?

Middle-man Fee !

[Taco Cowboy]

With all the data already collected actually it's not that hard to generate the dataset that Zoà Keating or any musician required, via data-mining.

The problem is on who's going to pay for the data-mining effort?

I reckon that if the Musicians (or any other people) wants the dataset and are willing to pay for it, there will be people who will be more than happy to provide the service.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[icebike]

That is not the biggest problem I see here.

The biggest problem is that she still doesn't understand the first sale doctrine. I bought a recording, not a relationship.

If I want to attend a concert i am perfectly capable of seeking that Information or joining a fan club. Any information she get from me should be at my decision.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Anonymous Coward]

That is not the biggest problem I see here.

The biggest problem is that she still doesn't understand the first sale doctrine. I bought a recording, not a relationship.

If I want to attend a concert i am perfectly capable of seeking that Information or joining a fan club. Any information she get from me should be at my decision.

She's talking about Pandora, which is a streaming service. You aren't purchasing anything, you didn't buy anything, so first sale doesn't apply.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Jumperalex]

Specifically you are correct with regards to "first sale". Generally you are not with regards to the "relationship". That is to say, I paid the rights to have music streamed to me in consideration for monies paid. What I did not pay for is a relationship. What's more, if that data IS provided then I expect some consideration in return. Pandora should not have to provide it free of charge, so they should get a discount on royalties paid, and in return I should not have to pay as much for the service be it fewer ads or lower fees.

I get her point. She is an artist trying to make a living. As an artist (her not me) I believe she genuinely wants to know who her fans are so she can engage with them more and expand her fan base. Artists want to be seen/heard/etc. That is a very personal thing for an artist. As a person trying to make a living out of it, I also understand her desire to use that very same data to help her market herself.

What she doesn't get is that it isn't her "right" to know who I am without my explicite agreement. She doesn't have to sell to me, and I don't have to buy from her. We BOTH have the right to demand terms bilaterally.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[mellon]

If she's asking for your personal details, then yeah, you have some cause for concern. But I doubt that's what she's asking for. TFA suggests that she wants to know where her work is popular, so that she can plan where to have her next concert, and target publicity effectively. Seems like a reasonable idea to me, although she may be disappointed to find that there is no locality to the data, and that her fans are actually evenly distributed across some large area.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Stan92057]

Radio advertising,Album sales and concerts will tell her everything she needs to know. no album sales and low ticket sales means she sucks or made a bad album and needs a different line of business. In my heydays i listen to the radio if i like the music i went out and got an album,8 track or cassette depending on the age. Buying the after mentioned listening to the radio or read the music magazines of the day i found out when a concert was planned. But the best indicators were radio play and requests.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[krakelohm]

But the best indicators were radio play and requests.

Thats sounds like what she is looking for.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[chrismcb]

What I did not pay for is a relationship.

But you did. Any time you trade money with someone, a relationship exists.

What she doesn't get is that it isn't her "right" to know who I am without my explicite agreement. She doesn't have to sell to me, and I don't have to buy from her. We BOTH have the right to demand terms bilaterally.

She doesn't know who YOU are. You don't have to buy from her, but you did. And she would like to know that, or at least as much info as Pandora can give her. Does that mean Pandora will ask for fewer royalties, perhaps.
Information like this ALREADY exists for radio stations. But a station like pandora can do an even better job.
You have a relationship with Pandora, much like you have a relationship with your local grocery store. Pandora has a relationship with the artist, just like the grocery store has a relationship with manufacturers. The manufacturers ask the store "what is the demographic of your buyers" just like she is asking Pandora "what is the demographic of the people who listen to my songs."
If you have a problem with it, don't listen to her songs (of course that means you can't listen to anyone's songs) or better yet don't listen to Pandora (or any other station) If you don't want people to know what you are listening to. Then go buy some CD's. And if you have a problem with that, buy them through a third party.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[NulDevice]

If you're an indie artist, you'll note that streaming services like Pandora, Spotify, etc are slowly displacing a lot of traditional album sales. And if you're an indie artist, radio play and advertising are basically nonexistent.

So I don't think she's asking anythign unreasonable. You want to know what venues to book for your next tour? Then you need to know who's listening. And if you're not selling albums the traditional way, and you're not getting radio play, then what you need are the metrics from the services that are delivering your music. You don't need to know eprsonal details, but vague geographical and demographic info makes a huge difference when you're planning out a tour or trying to figure out what sorts of magazine ads to buy, etc.

The services are clearly collecting the data, but god only knows what they're doing with it.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Stan92057]

Its been done long before the internet. Big bands draw big audience's, indies like her draw high school auditoriums.Just like the bands from the 50,s country music as well as rock bands. She can ask for anything she wants but if she's not popular and an indie like you say good luck That's the price she pays not signing a contract if one was even offered? Basically she in no position to demand anything. I don't even know who she is I don't listen to 99.9% of modern music anyways and given a choice I would rather have an album then digital.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Vlado]

But with actual sale, she would generally know at least how many copies of her work were sold at which location.
Here she just knows that all over the world (or wherever Pandora is available currently) her song or songs were played X amount of times. While this can make her happy if X is a great number, it doesn't give her insight into where (and with that, at least partially, who) her audience is. If she's an artist that not only wants to create art, but also wants to be commercially successful then such information could be quite helpful.
She doesn't want to force a relationship on YOU but she does want to make an informed decision on where she should turn in order to have the highest success rate in forming relationships.

I find it funny how /. crowd seems to chastise musicians and music industry in how they don't move along in their ways and how they're fixed in old business models. Here someone tries to get ahead of the game with a new approach and it's considered a bad move.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Vlado]

So if someone marks her song as a favorite in Pandora and rewinds it several times, that's a good indicator for her, right? And if Pandora can provide her with a generic demographic information, then she can get what she needs,
I don't see how that impacts you, as a listener, negatively in any way.

Re:Middle-man Fee !

[Stan92057]

I wasn't talking about ME at all. Im just saying there are other ways she can get info. And she doesn't just want generic info she wants a whole lot more. Mandatory Analytics is a lot more then just generic info. I personal don't buy any music online or steal it. I might listen to an oldies station that's it. Oldies lol Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Heart, among a long list of others, never thought ide be saying they were oldies lol

Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[SmallFurryCreature]

She sells a product, TO THE RADIOSTATION, who then sells it to us. I am quite sure that say, Hostess, would like to have the demographic data from each supermarket, but they can't have it because it is NOT their data.

It is only the odd nature of content (infinitely replicatable unlike physical products) and bought laws that even has music being counted (number of times played). Physical product makers sell X amount to resellers and that is all the data they get. Why do you THINK they hold product promotions requiring you to send in your address? To get some data on were their products end up because the supermarkets are NOT just going to tell them for the fun of it. The product maker delivers his goods to the supermarket and his involvement ends there. He wants more, he pays for it. Through the nose.

A supermarket has no obligation, legal or moral to even record, let alone report, how that pallet of cookies was distributed amongst its shops let alone its customers. The amount of entitlement in this Zoe the Freeloading cellist demand is staggering. You want to get in touch with your customers, engage them yourself. It is NOT a broadcasters job to do that for you. Setup a youtube channel or whatever and get people to give them your details, expecting a radiostation to do that for you is everything that is wrong with the content industry today.

Content is a product nothing more, I buy it the same as toilet paper and frankly I be a lot more upset running out of toilet paper then out of commercial content.

What next, MP3 players have to upload logs of the play history, so the bills can be send correctly? She wants to force the use of kinect with Pandora to count the number of listeners?

She wants private consumer data from a commercial entity for free. If it wasn't the content industry this would be instantly discarded in the waste basket of bloody stupid ideas. Really, would you be okay with Hostess getting your address from the supermarket that they got from your credit card?

NO! Hell, in Holland at least, the supermarket itself ain't even allowed to use its payment data to find out peoples addresses, they have the bank numbers but are not allowed to match them in anyway. That is why loyalty cards are not simply tied to your bank pas which would be far simpler then having a separate card and give far more reliable tracking data (you didn't think loyalty cards existed for any other reason did you).

But this bitch wants that data. Fuck OFF.

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[jittles]

She sells a product, TO THE RADIOSTATION, who then sells it to us. I am quite sure that say, Hostess, would like to have the demographic data from each supermarket, but they can't have it because it is NOT their data.

Except that Hostess probably DOES have that data. Why? Because for one thing, supermarkets are often regional. Secondly, Hostess stocks the products and puts up advertising materials and promos in the individual stores. Third of all, why wouldn't the supermarket want to share that data with hostess? If Hostess can take that data and use it to sell more Twinkies in that supermarket, why wouldn't they help their supplier help them sell more goods? What Hostess doesn't have is the information on how many Little Debbie cakes, or who is buying them (not without paying for it). As Hostess sells more volume through a chain, they offer discounts and other benefits. Its a mutually beneficial relationship.

It is only the odd nature of content (infinitely replicatable unlike physical products) and bought laws that even has music being counted (number of times played). Physical product makers sell X amount to resellers and that is all the data they get. Why do you THINK they hold product promotions requiring you to send in your address? To get some data on were their products end up because the supermarkets are NOT just going to tell them for the fun of it. The product maker delivers his goods to the supermarket and his involvement ends there. He wants more, he pays for it. Through the nose.

They do want your address, yes. You're right the supermarket doesn't give it to their suppliers without cost. But suppliers ship their goods to regional warehouses and that also helps them determine how their goods sell, and where they need to focus their efforts. I know someone who works at an alcohol distributor (in the US alcohol manufacturers cannot sell directly to stores). They are constantly working with the stores and their suppliers to sell product. Again the more volume they sell, the more money they make, and the better prices they get from their suppliers.

A supermarket has no obligation, legal or moral to even record, let alone report, how that pallet of cookies was distributed amongst its shops let alone its customers. The amount of entitlement in this Zoe the Freeloading cellist demand is staggering. You want to get in touch with your customers, engage them yourself. It is NOT a broadcasters job to do that for you. Setup a youtube channel or whatever and get people to give them your details, expecting a radiostation to do that for you is everything that is wrong with the content industry today.

I agree that she has no entitlement to this data, but if Pandora were smart, they would provide it. It would certainly increase the number of people who work with Pandora, providing more selection for customers, and would therefore increase the value of the Pandora brand.

Content is a product nothing more, I buy it the same as toilet paper and frankly I be a lot more upset running out of toilet paper then out of commercial content.

It's a digital product. She has no way of knowing what happens to it once it leaves her hands. It's not like she is a bakery. She has no clue where Pandora ships this because she does not have to supply more than one digital copy of the media. Your toilet paper manufacturer knows where it ships everything, and uses that to help determine sales.

What next, MP3 players have to upload logs of the play history, so the bills can be send correctly? She wants to force the use of kinect with Pandora to count the number of listeners?

She wants private consumer data from a commercial entity for free. If it wasn't the content industry this would be instantly discarded in the waste basket of bloody stupid ideas. Really, would you be okay with Hostess getting your address from the supermarket that they got fr

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[Anonymous Coward]

Content is a product nothing more, I buy it the same as toilet paper

Then I don't know why people complain when the Content Industry treats it that way, right?

What next, MP3 players have to upload logs of the play history, so the bills can be send correctly? She wants to force the use of kinect with Pandora to count the number of listeners?

That's right, she probably also wants to put a probe up your ass to measure your response to the music.

The amount of entitlement in this Zoe the Freeloading cellist demand is staggering.

Freeloader? Really?

expecting a radiostation to do that for you is everything that is wrong with the content industry today.

Content Industry? This is the ARTIST, dude. I thought this is the person WE WANTED TO GET THE BENEFITS. Now you are defending the middlemen? I hope I never hear another complaint about Paypal or eBay from the likes of you, but that's probably asking for too much.

But this bitch wants that data. Fuck OFF.

Holy crap what a disgusting place Slashdot has become. This shit gets +5 Insightful? Let me guess, you are one of those "self-diagnosed Aspergers", aren't you? (aka "007, license to be an asshole, wanked not stirred").

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[KermodeBear]

What next, MP3 players have to upload logs of the play history, so the bills can be sent correctly?

Do NOT give them any ideas.

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can almost guarantee you that Hostess gets that information. I *can* guarantee that anyone who sells through Walmart or Home Depot does. Companies get Point of Sale data detailing when a particular item was sold, at what store, for how much, etc. It's not possible to use *this* data to track down the actual customer. (A retailer could collect more data and share it, but that's another matter.)

disclaimer: I'm working on a project that takes point of sale data and makes useful numbers come out.

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[Draknor]

I agree that she has no entitlement to this data, but if Pandora were smart, they would provide it. It would certainly increase the number of people who work with Pandora, providing more selection for customers, and would therefore increase the value of the Pandora brand.

Her overall argument is that the information is more valuable to her than the $$ paid, and she would rather have the information about her "listens".
She writes she was paid $1652 for 1.5 million listens in Pandora in the first half of 2012, and that dollar amount is that ONLY information she gets.

I wish I could make this demand: stream my music, but in exchange give me my listener data. But the law doesn’t give me that power. The law only demands I be paid in money, which at this point in my career is not as valuable as information. I’d rather be paid in data.

She's not demanding it for free, she just wants access to it.

I've seen Zoe in concert -- she's a cool person & does some awesome stuff with music & technology. She's not a crazy, power-hungry fanatic, she just wants to be able to grow her personal business and make a decent living, and the information Pandora has can help her do that, but she doesn't have a way to get it (instead, Pandora just uses it to try & rescue their failing business model).

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[jittles]

I understand why she is asking for it. I am just agreeing with the GP that she is definitely not entitled to it. The argument I am trying to make is that Pandora and the artists both would be better off if that information was available to the artists.

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice rant, neanderthal.

All she wants is the aggregate listener data which those streaming services *MUST* collect in order to function, they're required by law to do so in order to satisfy ASCAP, RIAA, etc. So Pandora already has the data. They are already handing the data over to the various royalty agencies, as well commercial and advertising agencies. She wants that data because, guess what? She doesn't need the revenue from streaming services, she's already hugely successful financially. Instead of those pittance payments, she'd rather get to know where and how many fans she has. (this is all just numbers, anonymous data with no personal information)

Of course, you wanted an excuse to troll, so decided to go on some stupid, pointless rant, call her a "bitch", tell her to "fuck off", etc. In reality, she isn't asking for anything that isn't already being handed out to multiple agencies anyway. She also doesn't really *need* this, because she's already built a successful carreer from the ground up, without any sort of label or external investment. But it would be helpful data to have in planning tours, and it's a reasonable request.

Next time maybe think more, and do a little research, before running your mouth.

Re:Oh why is even THAT reasonable?

[chrismcb]

She sells a product, TO THE RADIOSTATION, who then sells it to us. I am quite sure that say, Hostess, would like to have the demographic data from each supermarket, but they can't have it because it is NOT their data.

To a certain degree you are correct. But Hostess COULD ask for that data, just like she is asking.
I'd be willing to bet though, that Hostess KNOWS how many units it sold to various distributors. She doesn't know that (and she should, her royalties are based on it) Hostess can also figure out the geographic distribution of its units. She can't do that either.

Grooveshark has this.

[rich90usa]

Grooveshark has some of this functionality. https://forrst.com/posts/Grooveshark_Artist_Dashboard-a2N

What about terrestial radio?

[whoever57]

Why aren't the artists pushing for royalties from terrestial radio? There is probably a lot more revenue to be gained from this.

Re:What about terrestial radio?

[asdbffg]

Artists already receive royalties for terrestrial radio. The metrics for tracking performances aren't very good, though.

Pandora's Response To This

[Anonymous Coward]

Yo, Yo Ma.

Spam

[EmperorOfCanada]

Yes that is exactly what Pandora's customers want; spam spam spam and more span from musicians.

This reminds me of the joke: How do you make a cellist's car go faster?........ remove the pizza delivery sign.

Any service that gave a person like this my data would instantly lose my business.

I hope that Pandora not only ignores her completely but that someone educates her about how much data privacy is worth to people. Some fools give private data away for free but if she wants most people data she should be willing to pay big bucks for it and expect to be turned down by the vast majority.

ya'll are jumping to conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

if you actually read her blog i don't see anywhere she demands anyones email address. it's all in response to IRFA, which is about setting royalty rates for internet radio. she puts forward a compromise by saying artists like her might prefer to be paid in some kind of data instead of the compulsory royalties required by law.

Re:How can I tell them I have a new album coming o

[Taco Cowboy]

... and this is the one thing that is so irritating.

Ms. Zoà Keating things that because people listen to her song she has the right to SPAM her listeners with announcement of new album / new gig / new whatever and so on.

Granted, a portion of her listeners would want to know everything she does, but a larger portion do not.

And it is not right for an artist to bug the listeners, whether they are paid listeners, or not.

Website and Facebook

[Anonymous Coward]

She'll find that having an easy to find website with a tour calendar and a newsletter will help.
And of course a Facebook page where she'll see all her fans.

When it's marketer vs consumer, Fuck the marketers

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's data about MY life. It's MY data.
And you can't have it to study, analyze, monetize, or use in any way unless i give YOU and only YOU specific permission to do so.

Opt out is bullshit. It's opt in or nothing. And i'm NOT going to opt in since lets be honest.
You're not going to give me anything that *I* want. Or even save me any money.
You are trying to gain something from me without giving me payment.

And to that i say FUCK YOU!

Does your company or business disagree?
Well then you should have no problem giving everyone access to all your businesses personal and financial data so we can do as we see fit with it.
We deserve to know everything that exists about your business right down to the smallest details. Above and beyond what is know about even public traded companies!

What? Fuck me? Yeah that's what i thought.
You hypocrites.

Sure, I'll sell you my data

[Arancaytar]

For free content.

Zero problems with it.

If you want my money and my data? Fuck that.

Re:Sure, I'll sell you my data

[Draknor]

That's exactly what she WANTS -- to have the option to get listener data IN PLACE of royalties. But the law doesn't provide for that currently.

I wish I could make this demand: stream my music, but in exchange give me my listener data. But the law doesn’t give me that power. The law only demands I be paid in money, which at this point in my career is not as valuable as information. I’d rather be paid in data.

Majors

[Anonymous Coward]

The Majors have a stake in a lot of the streaming services so why would they want transparency.

I think its a fair call by the artist. I'm after data to grow my business.

not too bright

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds intrinsically related to collecting user data without their consent or pushing them to provide it. Maybe I don't want musicians knowing where Iliveand what I'm doing, especially if such musicians are making money off my personal data.. and I'm not..NO DEAL

Without exception

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are younger female cellists always so attractive?

Re:Without exception

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all that time spent rubbing on a big wood instrument that is vibrating between her legs.

Re:Without exception

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are younger female cellists always so attractive?

Younger POPULAR cellists/violinists/pianists etc are generally attractive(not just the females). I'm guessing it is because once a certain level of competency is reached modern audiences don't know the difference between a good classical musician and a great classical musician but everyone likes attractive people.

Translation

[Anonymous Coward]

How do I reach them? Do they know I'm performing nearby next month? How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?

Translation: Digital retailers owe me free marketing.

I disagree, but at the most the retailers should provide her web-page/twitter/facebook address. Like is already done with CDs and DVDs.

Analytics Isn't Cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

She's assuming that you can just make analytics and it costs nothing. The problem is that this bitch knows nothing about technology. She thinks just because you can count the 'likes' on Facebook that she deserves any of that.

Analytics is business intelligence. It's valuable information that's difficult to get. And she's correct. Analytics can inform you to make decisions that will make you millions. But it's NOT a freebie. Consider stock data and Bloomberg terminals- to get the latest up to date stock information to inform your trades, you have to pay MILLIONS in fees. That's because that information is more valuable than gold. Getting together a programmer and business guys to draft and collect data isn't cheap. You don't deserve a part of the pie just because you puked out some content.

Consider this- there is NOWHERE she can go that she can get that data. It's on Pandora. That's it. They built a huge multimillion dollar company to collect this information, and they pay her contracted royalties for it. Why should she get it for free? If she wants data, then she'll have to pony up big money like the other companies that want it.

Oh god, this is really to simple

[SmallFurryCreature]

I have an agreement with Pandora, NOT the artist.

Re:Oh god, this is really to simple

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be surprised if your agreement with Pandora says they can do whatever they like with the data they collect on you, including providing it to "partners".

I'm not in the US though, so I wouldn't know. Mind checking?

Re:Oh god, this is really to simple

[Draknor]

And Pandora already reports your listening activity (just not to the artist):

Pandora Privacy Policy
We use the information that we collect for the following purposes:
[...]
* To pay artists and copyright owners for tracks you hear, by reporting listening information to copyright licensing agencies. These reports contain aggregated data only, and do not include your personally identifiable information.

All Zoe is asking for is access to that aggregated listening data, which you've already agreed you are okay with sharing (by using the Pandora service). But the laws do not currently require it, and she doesn't have a way to access it. Seems like a very reasonable request to me.

I actually like this

[Xacid]

I've been an avid paid Pandora listener for a few years and would love to see them find a way to improve their services especially if it can make them more marketable and last longer. This can benefit both the consumer and the artist if done properly and I think Zoe Keating, incidentally whom I discovered on Pandora, has the right idea.

When I find an artist I REALLY enjoy the first thing I end up doing is finding more of their songs not on Pandora...but on youtube. Then if I like a good portion of their stuff I'll usually go hunt for their album, which I usually try to buy directly from the artist when possible, or I'm looking to see if they're ever playing anywhere near me.

It would also be neat if it could show a map/chart of artists based on what you've thumbs upped previously or sort by station or something while you're in a buying mode. One thing I couldn't understand is how Pandora didn't enter into the music sales business as that would have flowed nicely with their current business. Imagine having an "add to cart" for songs you really dig and being able to play those on demand within the Pandora interface? Or just revert back to full on radio mode like always. There's just so much potential for this service and it typically nails what I'm in the mood to listening to.

Re:I actually like this

[Anonymous Coward]

When I find an artist I REALLY enjoy the first thing I end up doing is finding more of their songs not on Pandora...but on youtube.

Imagine having an "add to cart" for songs you really dig and being able to play those on demand within the Pandora interface? Or just revert back to full on radio mode like always.

That "on-demand" functionality kind of describes what Spotify does - although their radio stations are completely hit and miss compared to Pandora.. For example, my favorite drum and bass artist's radio frequently has top 40 hits in it on the former - I am guessing their radio selections are based less on musical styling and more on user data people who listen to this artist also listen to this frequently? (if anyone has insight on their algorithm, please correct me!) That considered, I tend to listen to Pandora more..

I like where your thoughts are headed on how liked/thumbs up songs are handled. While I gather that it helps shape the style of songs played on my station, it'd be nice to have a visual map of your recent musical preferences - maybe even station/artist recommendations based on your last 5~10 likes, you know?

Re:I actually like this

[Xacid]

Amen to that. Spotify is nice but I found the same thing - it was terrible at recommending anything new to me. That's what the major appeal to me is for it - I LOVE discovering new tunes.

Mixed metaphors are fun

[wonkey_monkey]

I guess the cat is out of the Pandora's box, eh?

Put your battle-axe back in the scabbard. You've made your bed; now you have to eat it. We could stand here and talk until the cows turn blue. It’s time to step up to the plate and lay your cards on the table.

Re:Mixed metaphors are fun

[geekoid]

If we hit that bulls eye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

She's right about one thing

[asdbffg]

Part of what she's asking for isn't so bad, namely aggregate metrics or just general listening statistics. I've got some music on Pandora as well, and I can say that they make absolutely no information available about how many people are listening, how many listeners skip the song, how many listeners give the song a thumbs up or down, etc. Once the music goes in, the rest if a big mystery.

She loses me when she suggests that she should just magically be able to get her listeners' contact information without some sort of opt-in. As much as I would love an epic mailing list of anyone who has ever heard my work... yeah... no...

So pay them for it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pay them like you pay your agent to do the same thing.

Pay them like you pay your label to promote your work.

Or is this just a demand for being paid AND getting even more free stuff from the grabby classes of worthless entertainers?

The contempt is not for the statement

[Anonymous Coward]

The contempt is your refusal to accept that you ARE a networker.

The contempt is the contempt YOU hold for the idea of being a networker. Others are just telling you "You're one too".

And stop being so bloody entitled. YOU are the reason why piracy is victimless: you deserve the same as you do. You demand free stuff, pirates demand free stuff. Except YOU get to whine on public TV.

Re:The contempt is not for the statement

[Jafafa Hots]

What the FUCK are you talking about?

I was unaware that I have a TV show. I was also unaware that I "deserve" piracy since I don't believe in the concept and don't charge any money for anything I create, giving it away freely.

Entitled?

I've seen it as a paid account feature

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure SoundCloud makes analytic data readily available if you have a paid account. (I'm a freebie moocher, so I don't use that feature but I'm fairly sure they advertize it in pushing the paid-for upgrade. Something to keep in mind if you're a musician with a promo site.)

May not have some of the features or distribution of some of the other sites, but hey if you're a musician trying to find your audience you should explore all channels if you haven't haven't put yourself into any agreements that restrict which ones you can use.

I don't WANT...

[Anonymous Coward]

...spam from an artist just because their song happened to randomly pop up on Pandora.

So FB it and ask.

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, WORK FOR A LIVING.

Rather than sponging off other people's work (oh and how they HATE it when you do that to them..!), do the work.

Or pay cost plus profit plus development to Pandora and each of the services just like any other business would do to, for example, TV or radio. Why the hell does this silly cow and you think this should be done for free, just because they'd like it?

Re:So FB it and ask.

[grahamm]

She is not asking for it "for free" she recognises that it has value so she is asking for it in lieu of financial reward. ie she is asking for something of value in (at least part) payment of the royalties due to her.

Re:So FB it and ask.

[geekoid]

Yes., she demands money for work already done.
I wonder if she pays twitter 1 penny every time she uses it?
Does she pay the person who made her instrument a royalty every time she uses it?

NO? then she can suck it.

Bad hair day

[Anonymous Coward]

When you're Zoe Keating, every day is a bad hair day.

Ask Facebook for your data....

[jameshofo]

I would say at least in the example of pandora she has no right, you gave that up when you get paid for it. Pandora created the medium, network, interface and built their customer base who subscribe to their product, or at least experience adds from it, if you want the data cough up some money for it! Facebook makes their money the same way, and information is their intellectual capital.

Music Genome Project

[Anonymous Coward]

Pandora is a part of the music genome project. If they were to release their data and influence the music industry in such a way then it would negate their research. The only way they could release the data would be to stop the project. It is not the same as other internet radio sites.

Don't look know

[ThatsNotPudding]

but you just described Capitolism.

Re:Don't look know

[Threni]

Or Emism.

Money for nothing and her chicks for free

[Ora*DBA]

So Pandora, Spotify et al are supposed to spend money on analytics as well as pay for the privilege of broadcasting her music? ROFLMAO! Classical musicians have always been coddled, spoiled brats.

Better yet, perhaps they should do this analysis for themselves, then, armed with GeoIP data, renegotiate the royalties. "Oh, you still insist on $1 per play? You know that concert you're playing in NYC next month? Noone in a 50-mile radius is going to be able to hear your music for the month preceding. But don't worry, we'll make sure you get your royalty check." Market that, idiot.

Re:Money for nothing and her chicks for free

[Draknor]

If you RTFA, you'd know she's not asking for free, she's asking for information INSTEAD of the royalty:

I wish I could make this demand: stream my music, but in exchange give me my listener data. But the law doesn’t give me that power. The law only demands I be paid in money, which at this point in my career is not as valuable as information. I’d rather be paid in data.

And $1 per play, huh? She wouldn't NEED listener information if she was making that kind of fat cash! Her royalty spreadsheet is linked from the article -- try $1652 for 1.5 million plays over 6 months on Pandora. So you were only off by... 3 orders of magnitude. Thanks for playing, though! Better luck next time in pulling stats out of your ass.

Re:Money for nothing and her chicks for free

[Anonymous Coward]

Analytics don't fall from the sky; they cost money and time to set up. She already gets royalties; why should she get this for free too? Perhas *instead* of royalties, then it makes sense.

the almighty dollar

[Anonymous Coward]

grow my business

And this is why music is shit now and we have to look to decades and sometimes centuries ago for good new work and good new performers.

Also, mention Adele and you can kindly kill yourself.

Probably not possible without end-user consent

[Stolpskott]

Sorry Zoë, but the way that I read the Pandora ToS and Privacy Policy, demographically sliced analytics are not covered by the existing Pandora legal agreements with the service users, although it might be a grey area because of the clauses about providing anonymized usage data for royalty calculation purposes.
If it is not covered by the existing agreements, then inclusion in Zoë's analytic data would require an opt-in from every Pandora user who listens to her music (not me, as personally I prefer Pablo Casals even though it is impossible to go to any of his live performances any more..., Jacqueline du Pré, or Mstislav Rostropovich).

So absurd I cannot leave it alone

[dbIII]

You mean like sit in an office and typing on a computer - is that REAL WORK? Or REAL WORK like digging potatoes with bare hands instead of lazy sponging like sitting in a tractor and making it do the work or cheating and using a shovel?
Sorry kid, but you are ridiculous. It takes all kinds to make a society and entertaining is still "real work" even if you and I do something different.

It's not "done for free" if a middleman is taking a cut. It appears she wants the middleman to do more REAL WORK (there it is again!) if they want to have the right to sell her stuff to other people.

I wouldn't trust any analytics

[Hillgiant]

from Pandora. Looking at the ads they serve me, they think I gamble, play flash games, shop at Lowes, support the tea party faction of the GOP, am single, and a homosexual.

I am none of these things. Which is why I mute the line any time an ad comes up.

Your sandwich

[Anonymous Coward]

I should own it, because I want it.

Re:Your sandwich

[khallow]

Your car is nicer than my PoS. I'll return it some day when you want it more. Maybe.

I offer this for free

[RivenAleem]

I won't claim any patent on this idea, she can have it for free.

She should write a song called "I Will Be Performing In Dallas On The 23 November 2012" and people who listen to her music will turn up.

Get a record label

[poofmeisterp]

If you want something to tell you how to perform in order to make money, sign with a record label.

*Oh, and start learning detox and how to hide from the press immediately!*

What, don't like that suggestion? Then find another line of work. /HUMOR, HUMOR

This is a contractual issue

[Anonymous Coward]

That they need to negotiate with Pandora on. They need to get over themselves. Pandora provides analytics for the right price. Move along.

tracking

[kiite]

I wonder how many people who posted comments here, thinking that streaming music analytics is a good idea, would also enable the do-not-track flag in their browsers and opt out of Google's targeted ads.

Maybe do some of the work yourself?

[danwesnor]

"How do I reach them?" Twitter. "Do they know I'm performing nearby next month?" Twitter. "How can I tell them I have a new album coming out?" Twitter.

I have other priorities for these services.

[kent_eh]

For me, a higher priority would be to have these streaming services actually exist in my country.
I think that would do more for these artists to promote their music to a wider audience.

Typical, selfish business.

[geekoid]

Here is a clue, dumb ass:
If people here it an like it they will go to this neat thing called 'Google'.
Then they will 'find' you.
You can post all the information about what you are doing on the internet via a 'website' or 'blog'
You might want to look into it.

"oh no, it's my business so spend money telling me things becasue my business is more important to anything else. WHAAAA! pay me more for work I already did years ago.. WHAAA!"

Zoe Keating - Online Sales & Streaming- Accoun

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't tend to post much, but no one says anything about this. It seems like, as usual, no one reads through everything completely, but Zoe herself has published her whole accounting logs online: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkasqHkVRM1OdEJFUnhyNFFkZjVSUWxhWGl1dE9lQXc#gid=0

If she finds more people in my city who want to hear her play, and comes over because of that, YAY!. That's all she's asking for, or at least, that's all she mentions on twitter.

Meh, this is all falling to deaf ears of people who think she wants ALL your information, so, I don't know why bother. She just wants the where and when. She knows that internet knowledgeable people will find her and subscribe to her mailing list (which she mostly sends out once every two months or so).

Enjoy her info. She's quite honest on what she's showing.

Re:Zoe Keating - Online Sales & Streaming- Acc

[Alyssey]

Shoot...forgot to log myself in...oh well...

Last.FM does all of this...

[NuAngel]

Sounds like someone should be using Last.FM. It "Scrobbles" listens by all users, compares them to similar acts, notifies users that the band they're listening to has upcoming shows in their area... hmm... still wondering why Pandora is such a big deal, when Last.FM has done all of this and more for about a decade!

Pay for you own data Lady

[Wingfat]

if you want Pandora to do all that for you, you as a muscian would have to PAY THEM and then you wont get any money when people listen. I'd say Update your Face Book page lady! and or your Wiki too.. your fans will follow you if they are your fans. As a Pandora user, I DO NOT LOOK at it.. i start the program and turn the screen off on what ever device i am using to listen. Automated scripts i have will press the I am still listening and or the Close on ads when they pop up. so her proposal on adding in info to Pandora will be useless for a user like me. (90% of us do what i do from what i have read)

OK

[sjames]

If she wants it, I'm sure it's available. It must have value since she wants it. I Kknow! She could buy the data from Pandora!! Perhaps in exchange for a better royalty.

Analytics

[phorm]

It would depend on how personal that information is. If the latest albums is found to be most popular amongst 22-year-old me who also like death-metal, perhaps the artist would then tailor to that artist. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Now if she's getting my email address or contact info to send me bulletins about "wonderful new album X," that's not cool.

Flamebait

[phorm]

I've read and thought, "Wow, this person is stupid."

Strange, I just read this and felt the same way, except that describing this AC as "stupid" would probably be generous.

GirlInTraining. You've got your own personal troll. I guess that means you make enough compelling and intelligent arguments to get yourself on some idiot's harassment list. Probably one of those dinosaurs that is intimidated by the thought of women - especially unavailable women - invading his little coffee-stained paradise.

Hostess

[phorm]

Hostess sells a physical product to the supermarket. The supermarket then sells that product to customers. They may or not share demographics to the manufacturers (Hostess etc), who knows.If the product doesn't sell well, Hostess already made their buck off the supermarket (though future revenue may be suspect for a product that doesn't sell).

Now this is plays for online radio. The amount of revenue is somewhat proportional to the plays, so the artist does how a fairly legitimate interest in at least making sure he/she is getting paid for the actual plays. Data beyond that is a bit different, but knowing what types of customers are interested in one's music is often in the interest of both artists and consumers (If an Artist finds the most listeners are in Switzerland, perhaps it's time to schedule a tour there).

She's been slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

And she replied
http://zoekeating.tumblr.com/post/36160121213/more-about-data-vs-royalties