Spotify, Pandora, Tidal, and the new Apple Music are all products of the vast shift to online streaming. However, before those services there was webcasting. It was a major way for people to listen to music online and to cut out commercials as well as diversify their listening. Of course, with the growth of new technology came the need for legislature that protected the rights of the artists being played. In the interview on Webcasting, it showed what a challenge it was to get companies and congress to agree to a set rate. First off, the interviewer for the webcast interview was not the best. He kept interjecting at random times with statements and question that hardly seemed relevant. It could also be that I didn’t agree with what he said, but that aside the interview broke down an agreement in 2006 between SoundExchange and webcasters that stipulated that webcasters would have to pay royalties to use artist’s music. In the interview, John Simson talks about how broadcasters don’t pay royalties, but that doesn’t mean that webcasters should have that right as well. SoundExchange, which was created by RIAA but separated in 2003, is in charge of gathering royalties for the artists that have signed up for their service. They then distribute it to the artists as a go between. Easy …show more content…
However, they could apply this amount to what they owe in royalties. It works kind of like a down payment, they don’t have to pay any royalties until they are able to pay of that $25,000. Therefore, artists still get some money but webcasters aren’t being put out of business. Finally, another part of the settlement was that webcasters would not have to report precise stats on which music they stream. Therefore, they wouldn’t have to send a specific list of every song they used in to collect for royalties and would make it harder to properly distribute
Singers and songwriters need to make a living somehow. They know that downloading music is a way to get their voice heard, but they also know that it is significantly hurting the business. "When your product is being regularly stolen, there comes a time when you have to take appropriate action," said RIAA president Cary Sherman (RIAA 1). There are a lot of people involved in the music scheme when it comes to who needs to get paid by the revenue. From the sale of one CD, singers get one small fraction of the cost, another fraction goes to song writers, musicians also get some of the profit along with retailers, engineers, technicians, warehouse working, and ever...
The Web. 26 Feb. 2014. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/10/music-streaming-songwriters-youtube-pandora>. Luckerson, Victor. The "Business & Money" Business Money Revenue Piracy Down Has the Music Industry Finally Turned a Corner Comments.
“It is estimated that such illegal product costs the music industry more than 300 million dollars a year domestically.” This is why the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is taking a strong stance against MP3 piracy. The damage done to the recording industry in lost profits, increased prices, and lost jobs is overwhelming. In an attempt to put a damper on file swapping, and recapture lost revenue the RIAA has been suing people ...
The stakeholders involved in this case are the artists, the recording industry as a whole, retailers, and consumers. All of these stakeholders are affected equally in this matter. The artists, recording industry, and music retailers face substantial loss of income if c...
The Internet—as it did for almost everything—has radically changed the way people get music. The Internet has cut into the music industry's profits. It reduced the demand for CDs, increased the interest in singles and let people decide whether they want to pay for the new Prince album. This alone could be offset if all of the people pirating music would go to their favorite artists' shows. However, the hard economy has rapidly cut into people's ability to spend on luxury items and concerts rank right up there with sports in terms of practicality.
Recently, there has been a series of copyright infringement litigations against Internet businesses that are involved with unauthorized distribution of music files. The US recording industry claims to lose three million dollars per year because of piracy. A report predicted an estimated 16 percent of all US music sales, or 985 million dollars would be lost due to online piracy by 2002 (Foege, 2000; cited from McCourt & Burkart, 2003) Even though this claim has to be taken with caution, as it is based on false assumption that if copyright laws were strictly enforced, audio pirates would become buyers, it is apparent that audio piracy grew to a worrisome level for the record industry. (Gayer & Shy, 2003)
It’s probably not feasible to avoid streaming music services nowadays. Every smart phone on the market is able to operate numerous music streaming applications, ranging from radio-style streaming, on-demand streaming, and even cloud-streaming. Smart TVs come equipped with Spotify, Pandora, or Rdio. AT&T partners with Beats music to offer a unique on-demand music streaming service with playlists complied by DJs. It seams that with the advent of Wifi hotspots and high-speed mobile Internet services, music streaming is becoming more and more a part of mainstream life. Spotify has been in the spotlight within this particular segment of the streaming industry ever since its introduction to the United States in 2011. (Roose, n.d.)
An “analyst” was quoted in the case (in 2002) as saying that “people will pay for music on the Internet, eventually.” This person was skeptical of the willingness of consumers to pay for
The entertainment industry and many musicians regarded P2P as a big crisis for copyright, so that they sued the company that produced Napster. “Anger leads Metallica to the Internet,” an article by Karen Schubert in USA TODAY, noticed that heavy-metal band Metallica was suing Napster. And now some people in the music industry are fighting with a distributor of P2P software even in the Supreme Court, and lobbying to outlaw P2P technology. In “File sharing goes to High Court,” USA ...
Spotify is one of the most popular streaming services. And since its breakthrough, access to music have never been easier – just type in the name of an artist or a song and press play. The advantage of it is that listeners gets to listen to their wanted music instantly and for free and artist gets paid royalties. But since spotify’s big breakthrough there has been big debates if free music streaming is going to kill the music industry or if it’s going to help it.
"The mass production of free, high-quality re-recorded music became a serious threat to the music industry" ("Music Industry"). This mass production is costing artists and producers money that they would have made from people buying their music. Listeners have turned to streaming services as a cheaper alternative to purchasing to songs they love. Streaming services have increased the availability of music, which one may think is a good thing but is in fact a fulmination to the music industry because artists are not making as much money as they would have if songs were being purchased individually. People who worked in the music industry had showered praise on to streaming services, considering them a savior that would help the music industry and increase revenue, but they instead had an adverse effect on music sales and artist salary (O’Brien). Streaming services have led to protests from artists on many different levels due to the amount of payment that artists are receiving. "Prince, Neil Young and Ms. Swift have withdrawn their music from some streaming outlets, and various musicians have called for greater transparency in how the music industry operates (Sisario).” While the protests have been successful, it is only when famous high-level artists bring attention to the issues. This controversy is one of the negatives of streaming services because
Spotify is on-demand streaming music player. After registration and downloading the desktop application user gains access to more than 20 million songs that are currently available on Spotify [1]. The main characteristic of Spotify’s streaming service is that it does not sell music, but it gives access to it. Streaming digital music is based on agreements with content owners - record labels, digital distributors, aggregators and publisher collecting societies, to whom Spotify pays out royalties [2]. Without these agreements there would be no music to stream. Basically, Spotify has an intermediary role as it distributes music content from right holders to listeners.
Society is feeling the impact of the shift in educational options. However, while there are more opportunities for students, there is another door opened for inequality to take place. As technology advances, a social phenomenon is beginning to change the way that Americans are obtaining college degrees. Approximately 3.2 million students were enrolled in at least one completely online class in the fall semester of 2005 (Clark-Ibanez & Scott, 2008). The effects of technological advances within the educational setting are having an impact on the way in which students are learning, leaving some students with limited options.
Harwood, E. (May 2004). Staying Afloat in the Internet Stream: How to Keep Web Radio from Drowning in Digital Copyright Royalties, Federal Communications Law Journal, 56(3), 673-697.
Imagine someone born in the early 1900’s entering a modern-day classroom. They would likely be confused as to what televisions, computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices are. It is also likely that they would be overwhelmed by the instant access to information that the internet provides. Digital media has become a large part of people’s everyday lives especially with the rise of digital media in classrooms. Digital media is growing so rapidly that people who are not adapting to this shift in culture are falling behind and becoming victims of the “digital divide”, this is leaving people misinformed. Digital media has a large effect on the way that people communicate, this is especially evident in the way that students interact with