
Why musicians are so angry at the world’s most popular music streaming service - stablemap
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/why-musicians-are-so-angry-at-the-worlds-most-popular-music-streaming-service/2017/07/14/bf1a6db0-67ee-11e7-8eb5-cbccc2e7bfbf_story.html
======
justaaron
There's the "music industry" and then there is the music industry. Most
independent musicians (which is like, 90% of us, and perhaps 90% of genre
representation) are not represented by any agents of these large parasitic
popular-music-peddling corporations, neither in unit sales (cds, downloads)
nor streaming nor bookings.

While, in this case, we are discussing the large music distributors: Apple,
Amazon, etc, I feel it a good time to bring-up the curious fact that, while
copyright law exists in a large portion of the world, there are private
entities: associations of lawyers, who purport to represent ALL copyright
holders for a given nation. ASCAP, BMI, SPA, SUICA, etc...each nation has this
private entity sitting on top of copyright law enforcement claiming to be THE
money funnel by which people should pay for licensing of all media.

Venues where music is played are supposed to keep a list of songs played and
pay accordingly, or more usually, there is a flat fee paid as a kind of tax,
which ostensibly should go to the artists whose music was played. Copyright
societies can visit venues or events with fiscal policing agents and control
them. Copyright societies have a global accounting network by which they
settle at various intervals.

The only kink in the works is that they also collect money for those they
DON'T represent (aka, that's what happens when a private entity gets a
government sanctioned collections role) and while it's supposed to be
accessible for non members to obtain, the reality is that without the proofs
of plays that the societies themselves have access too, one will have very
little luck... The money sits in the various copyright societies coffers...

