
Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties - pakafka
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110212/pandoras-music-fees-are-huge-and-not-that-bad/
======
yason
I wish there was a 'compulsory licensing' for individuals for personal use.
Pay a lump sum and then you're obliged to receive a license for downloading
whatever you want from whatever source you like. If the MPAA/RIAA goons log
your IP address and send you a notice of copyright infringement, slam the
license on their face, and politely ask them to fsck off.

~~~
alain94040
Would you support the same compulsory licensing for the software you write?
Are shareware authors bad people? (I'm trying to push this argument to
understand why we need to treat music differently).

~~~
j_baker
Music isn't different, but it's treated that way presently. For instance, if I
build a website using Windows, .Net, and SQL Server, I don't have to give
Microsoft 50% of my revenue. Same with shareware. I don't have to rely on
other big companies to negotiate deals with the shareware authors. I just buy
the software directly from them.

~~~
shizcakes
This is a poor analogy. Pandora isn't paying music fees once to listen to the
songs in their office, they are paying recurring fees because they then
redistribute that music to others in a streaming fashion.

~~~
j_baker
That's because I wasn't making an analogy. I'm showing how two similar
business transactions (ie, they both involve being able to use content of some
kind be it software or music) are artificially made different by laws and
"leverage". I mean, there are very few software companies that can place the
limitations on their software and charge the same way the music and movie
industries do.

------
jaaron
Splitting at least 50% with the studios or labels is pretty standard. It's one
reason why the Apple 30% app store tax makes no sense for some businesses
(ebooks, vod, music).

~~~
mnutt
Or alternatively it's why record label contracts make no sense anymore.

------
blhack
Facebook used to spend (1/0)% of revenue on hosting.

~~~
j_baker
So facebook spent a mathematically undefined amount on hosting? Sounds like
something a BigCo would do to get out of paying their hosting bill.

------
anonymous246
Content producer makes decent money. Middlemen (aka "Internet companies", HN)
freak out. News at 11.

~~~
j_baker
There's a difference between making money and highway robbery. And note that
we aren't talking about content _producers_ making money. We're talking about
middlemen who serve very little purpose anymore making far more money than
they deserve.

~~~
dustingetz
nobody "deserves" anything.

~~~
j_baker
I'm sure we could have an interesting philosophical or religious debate over
that subject, but it's not really relevant to my point. My point is that
record labels take far more out of the system than they put in. That's bad
both from a moral standpoint of what people deserve and a pragmatic standpoint
of efficiency.

~~~
rick888
According to you they take more out, but the truth is, they put in just as
much. Artists willingly go to labels because most of the time, they either
don't have the resources or just aren't interested in dealing with everything
that has to do with the music business (it is and always has been a business).
They just want to concentrate on what they do best: playing music.

Unless you outlaw business, there will always be labels because there will
always be an artist that doesn't know how to deal with the business side of
the industry. They also might want connections that they otherwise wouldn't be
able to have.

Venture capitalists serve the same purpose as a record label, yet this entire
forum is based around the industry and nobody here seems to have a problem
with them.

