Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How has Spotify changed the music industry
State of the current music industry
Changes in the music industry
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How has Spotify changed the music industry
Spotify: Are artists being paid enough?Since Spotify’s launch in 2008, the music industry has changed rapidly. With download revenue down and streaming revenues hitting huge figures, artists and record labels are concerned that they are not being paid enough. Huge artists such as Taylor Swift, Thom Yorke, and Beck have all had disputes with Spotify resulting in the artists removing their catalog from the service. Whilst it could be argued that relying on sound recording revenue to survive is not a sensible outlook on the industry, it cannot be denied that Spotify needs to pay them more. Spotify (2017) announced it has over 140 million active users with a catalog of over 30 million songs and still, artists are being paid very little. David McCandless, author of ‘Information Is Beautiful’, produced an illustration to show the pittance Spotify pay artists. …show more content…
This is a clear indication that Spotify is not only underpaying, but also overlooking grassroots artists.In addition to this, streaming services have resulted in a decline of illegal downloads –seemingly good news for the artist, however, is it much of an improvement? IFPI (2017) note that in 2016 streaming revenue grew by 60.4%, whilst physical revenue declined by 7.6% and download revenue by 20.5%. Ellis-Peterson (2017) notes “It is a vastly different story from the previous 15 years, where record labels saw a decline of 40% in revenue as piracy took its toll, physical sales declined and record shops went out of business”. Yes, it is good that there has been a decline in illegal downloads but it cannot be a great improvement for the artist because not only are they underpaid, streaming services have hindered their ability to maximise their download
In the past, singers made money through CDs and cassettes. These forms of media have been replaced with digital copies of albums and songs. Even this method of accessing music has begun to fade away with the replacement of streaming services such as Spotify, Apple Music, or Soundcloud. Artists’ music has also been used in advertisements. This can negatively affect the artist’s career. Music artists shouldn’t have their songs in advertising.
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...
Big time record companies and artist are losing billions of dollars due to people illegally downloading music files. The
The limitless access to music makes it easy to forget that people's careers rely on the profit behind every song. A profit that is continually shrinking, something that is forcing companies to re-think the way they get music to us, the fans. This will affect everyone who has the slightest interest in music. Some for the worse, but many for the better. MUSIC INDUSTRY STATE Earlier this year (DATE?)
While many suggest that music piracy is destroying the music industry, others claim that it is actually helping. On average, people who pirate music “legitimately purchase 30 percent more music than non-P2P (Peer to peer) users.” This is what Betsy Issacson claims (Issacson). Most of this music is copied from friends and families that bought it from a music store. In 18-29 year olds, this is where they get about 30% of their music from.
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)
Everyone can say that music has become a major part of almost everything in our lives, but many argue about whether or not music is a luxury or whether we need it to survive. Music has been around for as long as anyone can remember, yes it has evolved, but there’s always been music it seems. From tribes performing their rituals with music, all the way to someone listening to it just for fun. But, many say that a human needs music to survive, that without it life would not go on. And like mentioned before, it has been around for many years and it seems like one cannot picture a world without it. In my opinion, I believe, that one does not need music to live, it is just something people like to do while studying, practicing a sport, or just for fun.
Spotify is an on-demand music streaming service that provides a two tiered service to its users. The free service allows users to listen to any song on demand within the application’s music catalogue, but with the presence of ads. The premium service, however, is completely ad free. Launched in 2008 in Sweden, Spotify has grown and currently has over 24 million active users. (Sisario, B) As a result of several deals struck with EMI, Sony, Universal, and Warner Music Group, Spotify currently holds a music catalogue of roughly 20 million songs.
...his since they make money for licensing the music for the streaming services. Labels are embracing the streaming services since this allows another way for making revenue in a not so strong music economy.
Consumers rely on their smartphones and laptops to listen to music on-demand. Although there are many music streaming companies, Spotify was one of the first to let consumers access millions of artist without buying individuals songs or albums. With Spotify, consumers pay for a premium subscription that allows access to every artist, album, and song within their library of
People pay low subscription fees to streaming services, and as a result of this, listeners can be exposed to new artists and help these artists become popular (“Music Industry”). New artists are exposed to more people as streaming services often increase the amount of artists that people listen to. While streaming services do result in more exposure for an artist, that’s where the benefits stop. One of the issues with streaming services is payment issues. "Public relations missteps in the early 2000s kept many musicians from speaking out about economic issues, artists and executives said... But the shift toward streaming in recent years has prompted many musicians to investigate the changes in the business and comment online (Sisario)." Artists are not being paid much for providing their music to streaming services, but these issues and artist protests are being ignored by executives of the services until a high-profile artist makes the wage disparity public. "Streaming services pay a lot less than downloads, with the artists receiving a fraction of a cent per play on the service. Newer artists could struggle with the level of payments offered by the services, opponents have argued (O’Brien).” Hardworking artists are not receiving as much money from streaming services as they did from people purchasing their albums. This
At the turn of the millenium, the music industry has been faced with an unforeseen phenomenon that has affected its very foundation - mass scale music piracy. The decline of CD sales in the past three years have been blamed on the availability of songs that can be downloaded from Internet sites and service providers like Napster, KaZaA and Morpheus free of charge. Today the issue of intellectual copyright infringement in music has been taken more seriously than ever before, as large record labels and companies like Sony and EMI struggle to maintain healthy album sales in the face of online music piracy. In addition, music piracy affects more than just the corporate world - it affects the very artists who create music and receive no compensation for their efforts. In fact ?many high-profile and buzz artists, including Eminem, Oasis and most recently 50 Cent, have seen their upcoming albums undercut by file-sharing online before their scheduled releases, prompting record labels to move up street dates to avoid losing album sales.? (Grossberg) In light of this, are a few positive aspects in the face of such widespread negativity but music file sharing continues to be a controversial topic in the world of music and the arts in general.
First of all it’s successfully fighting against piracy, and turns former pirates into music consumers. Because there’s no reason why one would steal music when it can be easily “taken” for free in an absolutely legal way that benefits not only music consumers but artists too. And even though you can use Spotify for free more and more people are getting premium membership and paying the $9.99 monthly fee in return to get add free music streaming and the availability to listen to music offline. But some major labels are pushing Spotify towards limiting freemium membership, to convince more people to pay monthly fee, Ek refuses to do it, for obvious reasons – people will always find ways to get music for free, so if they won’t get it on Spotify they will find other places to do it and most likely in an illegal way. But still quite a few well known artist like Radiohead’s Thom Yorke, Taylor Swift, Johnny Marr and many others who are against Spotify, stating that it’s paying pennys for artist and that they are giving up their music for free, and staying with iTunes rather than Spotify. iTunes, in my opinion, is good for short term income, as when people buy a song they can listen to it as many times as they want and artist don’t get any more income from that song after someone have bought it, where as if an artist have their songs on Spotify even after 20 years
There has been controversy as to whether music should be free or not. As for the people who love to listen to music all the time, they would agree that the music should be free of charge. Benefits of free music are that you can listen to music fan free, helps out bands to be known, and reaches the crowds in less time and boots the popularity of the song; however, there are drawbacks, such as CD & MP3 gross sales decline, it’s an insult & harmful to artist and in all actuality, you are paying the record labels.
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.