Major music labels and digital downloads

We listen to stuff outside of H!P? What?!?

Moderator: tsukinobyouin

Post Reply
User avatar
eri
ANGERME
Posts: 3295
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:50 pm

Major music labels and digital downloads

Post by eri »

http://gizmodo.com/5417318/my-6247-royalty...gital-downloads



Well, not so much "screw" but it was an interesting read about a musician's experience with his label. I just read about Korea's biggest music company gives their stars absolutely absurd contracts and it got me wondering what the industry was like otherwise -- especially regarding online music sales and exposure.


Tim Quirk was the singer of punk-pop outfit Too Much Joy, signed by Warner Bros. in 1990. Now he's an executive at an online music service, giving him insight on digital sales data and just how labels fudge their numbers.



I got something in the mail last week I'd been wanting for years: a Too Much Joy royalty statement from Warner Brothers that finally included our digital earnings. Though our catalog has been out of print physically since the late-1990s, the three albums we released on Giant/WB have been available digitally for about five years. Yet the royalty statements I received every six months kept insisting we had zero income, and our unrecouped balance ($395,277.18!)* stubbornly remained the same.



Now, I don't ever expect that unrecouped balance to turn into a positive number, but since the band had been seeing thousands of dollars in digital royalties each year from IODA for the four indie albums we control ourselves, I figured five years' worth of digital income from our far more popular major label albums would at least make a small dent in the figure. Our IODA royalties during that time had totaled about $12,000 – not a princely sum, but enough to suggest that the total haul over the same period from our major label material should be at least that much, if not two to five times more. Even with the band receiving only a percentage of the major label take, getting our unrecouped balance below $375,000 seemed reasonable, and knocking it closer to -$350,000 wasn't out of the question.



So I was naively excited when I opened the envelope. And my answer was right there on the first page. In five years, our three albums earned us a grand total of… $62.47.

...



my gig at Rhapsody is the only reason I was able to get them to add my digital royalties to my statement in the first place. For years I'd been pestering the label, but I hadn't gotten anywhere till I was on a panel with a reasonably big wig in Warner Music Group's business affairs team about a year ago



The panel took place at a legal conference, and focused on digital music and the crisis facing the record industry**. As you do at these things, the other panelists and I gathered for breakfast a couple hours before our session began, to discuss what topics we should address. Peter Jenner, who manages Billy Bragg and has been a needed gadfly for many years at events like these, wanted to discuss the little-understood fact that digital music services frequently pay labels advances in the tens of millions of dollars for access to their catalogs, and it's unclear how (or if) that money is ever shared with artists.



I agreed that was a big issue, but said I had more immediate and mundane concerns, such as the fact that Warner wouldn't even report my band's iTunes sales to me.



...

The sad thing is I don't even think Warner is deliberately trying to screw TMJ and the hundreds of other also-rans and almost-weres they've signed over the years. The reality is more boring, but also more depressing. Like I said, they don't actually owe us any money. But that's what's so weird about this, to me: they have the ability to tell the truth, and doing so won't cost them anything.



They just can't be bothered. They don't care, because they don't have to.

"$10,000 Is Nothing"



...As you may have divined by this point, I am conflicted about whether I am actually being a petty jerk by pursuing this, or whether labels just thrive on making fools like me feel like petty jerks. People in the record industry are very good at making bands believe they deserve the hundreds of thousands (or sometimes millions) of dollars labels advance the musicians when they're first signed, and even better at convincing those same musicians it's the bands' fault when those advances aren't recouped (the last thing $10,000-Is-Nothing-Man yelled at me before he hung up was, "Too Much Joy never earned us shit!"*** as though that fact somehow negated their obligation to account honestly).



...



I asked Danny why there were no royalties at all listed from iTunes, and he said, "Huh. There are no domestic downloads on here at all. Only streams. And it has international downloads, but no international streams. I have no idea why." I asked Danny why the statement only seemed to list tracks from two of the three albums Warner had released – an entire album was missing. He said they could only report back what the digital services had provided to them, and the services must not have reported any activity for those other songs. When I suggested that seemed unlikely – that having every track from two albums listed by over a dozen different services, but zero tracks from a third album listed by any seemed more like an error on Warner's side, he said he'd look into it. As I asked more questions (Why do we get paid 50% of the income from all the tracks on one album, but only 35.7143% of the income from all the tracks on another? Why did 29 plays of a track on the late, lamented MusicMatch earn a total of 63 cents when 1,016 plays of the exact same track on MySpace earned only 23 cents?) he eventually got to the heart of the matter: "We don't normally do this for unrecouped bands," he said. "But, I was told you'd asked."

..

There's a theory that labels and publishers deliberately avoid creating the transparent accounting systems today's technology enables. Because accurately accounting to my silly little band would mean accurately accounting to the less silly bands that are recouped, and paying them more money as a result.

...


Full read via link.
Last edited by eri on Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ShinUkyo
Juice=Juice
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:19 am

Re: Major music labels and digital downloads

Post by ShinUkyo »

Oh wow, VERY fascinating read! I've always had worries that digital music distribution was going to screw with the system. Especially since, like the article says, there are so many ways in which digital distribution exists nowadays. Through a huge number of websites, and it can be had in both downloaded and streaming form. As if there weren't enough complexities with royalties in the olden days, back when I followed the process myself, now it's just absurd. And it's stacked to where the labels have more control and less accountability, due in part to that absurd complexity. This makes me wish I had more time online, as I love reading stuff like this. I've also fallen irreparably behind on researching recent music writers and producers, something I used to love doing. And now with the sheer amount of information on the internet, the info is infinitely more accessible.
-ShinUkyo
MM-BBS 1st Generation. Almost 20 years and still going strong.
Now to make a new signature pic since my old ImageShack account was yeeted.
User avatar
neshcom
ANGERME
Posts: 3782
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:13 am

Re: Major music labels and digital downloads

Post by neshcom »

This is why we should pirate songs and mail cash directly to the artists! <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... dammit.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':geof:' />
Post Reply