Safe Harbor Cost the US Music Industry Up To $1B in Lost Royalties Per Year, Study Finds (musicweek.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: For the first time, researchers have quantified the "value gap" and its impact on the US recorded music industry. A study published yesterday (March 29) by Washington, DC-based economy think tank the Phoenix Centre For Advanced Legal And Economic Public Policy Studies attempted to calculate how much revenue the recording industry loses from the distortions caused by the safe harbor provisions. Entitled Safe Harbors And The Evolution of Music Retailing, the study was conducted by T. Randolph Beard, George S. Ford and Michael Stern who applied "accepted economic modelling techniques" to simulate revenue effects from royalty rate changes on YouTube. It showed that if YouTube were to pay the recorded music industry market rates, similar to what other streaming services pay, its economic contributions to the sector would be significantly bigger. The premises used by the Phoenix Centre economists was that, according to the music recording industry, YouTube evades paying market rates for the use of copyrighted content by exploiting the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's "safe harbor" provisions, which allow to post creative content online in good faith and remove it if rights holders so require. Using 2015 data, the Phoenix Centre found that "a plausible royalty rate increase could produce increased royalty revenues in the US of $650 million to over one billion dollars a year."

Comments

Re:Study was paid for by music industry...

[OrangeTide]

I've bought numerous albums on bandcamp because I stumbled onto them on YouTube.

Now I understand that Bandcamp isn't likely included in the concerns of mainstream record companies. But I do believe that I am an active consumer that is spending money in this industry, and that I am not "stealing" billions of dollars.

Who are these guys?

[jandrese]

I have never heard of the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Policy Studies so I went to the their website. Unfortunately I can't find anything talking about their funding sources. However, they do have a prominent endorsement on their homepage from Ajit Pai, which is a substantial red flag.

Propublica sadly only has their funding lumped together as "contributions", which doesn't help.

Re:Who are these guys?

[jandrese]

Update: I found the closest thing to a mission statement I could find buried in a wall of text on page 17 of their 2013 tax return.

Although the Phoenix Center does not meet the safe harbor test for public support (33-1/3%) in 2013, it believes that the following facts and circumstances support the organization's continuance as a public charity. The Phoenix Center has grown and developed since its inception to become a voice for consumer welfare by promoting free markets, competition, and individual freedom and liberty.

In other words, its exacta what everyone thinks. This is yet another one of those corporate mouthpiece "think tanks" that release studies to push a corporate agenda.

This is not about you. This is about Google.

[uCallHimDrJ0NES]

Wow, you people lining up to identify with Google's interests are totally missing the point. Google is not your friend. This study is about Google paying royalties. Not you.

Re:My how have the tables turned

[gmack]

Youtube already has a fix for this problem. Just use their Content ID sytem

that lets you decide how to deal with other people using your music. You can block, mute, or monetize the infringing video.