Century Media suing BitTorrent users... Opinions???

[nailz]

Yikes. I'm beginning to feel like I should cancel my Spotify account.

I'll keep mine, because as a Service, Spotify is fucking fantastic and fufills everything I need it to. I want it to be successful, so I'm willing to sink money into the company in hopes that someday soon they'll be able to actually compensate artists correctly.

On the other hand, I wonder how much Urban makes from his songs playing on the Radio...oh, wait.

 

[AngraRULES]

I'll keep mine, because as a Service, Spotify is fucking fantastic and fufills everything I need it to. I want it to be successful, so I'm willing to sink money into the company in hopes that someday soon they'll be able to actually compensate artists correctly.

On the other hand, I wonder how much Urban makes from his songs playing on the Radio...oh, wait.

ROFL, this.

For many, many years, everybody whined and complained about there not being an alternative to illegal downloads and the low sales numbers.

Spotify is a solution that, while not perfect, provides exactly what artists and labels bitched about for so many years. Good quality, digital access to music that actually pays the artists. It's little, but it does.

This is the type of company that, down the road, may finally change the music business for the better. This is exactly the kind of step in the right direction in my opinion. Again, still NOT PERFECT.

Let's be fair... Have record labels done anything to help change the landscape? They partnered with companies like Spotify, they made digital copies available, etc. They are trying to adapt. Now Urban, I have to ask you... what have YOU done to adapt and change the landscape of the music business? If you have any suggestions, especially proactive ones, please do share 'cause I'd love to hear them. I think brainstorming and offering ideas that make sense can eventually get you somewhere. Saying you'd rather people download your music for free, on the other hand, won't.

 

[dcowboys311]

I'll keep mine, because as a Service, Spotify is fucking fantastic and fufills everything I need it to. I want it to be successful, so I'm willing to sink money into the company in hopes that someday soon they'll be able to actually compensate artists correctly.

So why not spend your money on a cheap Russian mp3 site instead? As a service, they are fucking fantastic. I want a fucking fantastic service to be successful, so I'll give them my money. Nevermind that the mp3 site is the one making the money....maybe one day, they'll decide to distribute their profits!

On the other hand, I wonder how much Urban makes from his songs playing on the Radio...oh, wait.

Where is the glorious, magickal radio that allows you unlimited, on-demand play and the gratification of that 'I'm not a thief -- I pay for music!' feeling?

 

[AeonicSlumber]

So why not spend your money on a cheap Russian mp3 site instead? As a service, they are fucking fantastic. I want a fucking fantastic service to be successful, so I'll give them my money. Nevermind that the mp3 site is the one making the money....maybe one day, they'll decide to distribute their profits!

Spotify is legal, the Russian mp3 site is not. Spotify is a streaming service that connects to a distributor. A band cannot just sign up for it. It has to have a distro (either a major one like Caroline, RED, Fontana, or a DIY one like Tunecore). Therefore, it's up to the rights holder to decide if he or she wants coverage on Spotify. The Russian mp3 site will decide whether or not it wants to ignore your copyright rights.

 

[General Zod]

Referring to what Urban said earlier in the thread:

• A Spotify account costs $9.95 a month, roughly $120 a year
• A CD on iTunes costs $9.95 a year

Which supports the artist continuity more?

1. Subscribing to Spotify for one year
2. Downloading music via torrents and purchasing 12 digital CDs per year

NOTE: My question is merely a hypothetical one, that sets aside the legal and ethical issues

 

[AeonicSlumber]

Well no, there's a free version of Spotify too though. And the artist still gets paid the same amount of money regardless if the user is streaming from a premium account or not. The $10 monthly payments really just go straight to Spotify.

As for what supports the artist community more, it's debatable. Alot of labels are under the impression that Spotify offsets CD sales which leads to loss of revenue. I don't really believe that though. I don't think physical media will ever die. I think that people who use Spotify wouldn't have bought that CD in the first place so if anything it's more money to the rights holder. Yes, it's fractions of pennies, but if 10 million people who aren't music lovers use Spotify regularly, that's hundreds of thousands of dollars, or millions of dollars even, being added to the music economy. Sweden is the origin of Spotify if you will, and apparently 40% of music revenue now comes from Spotify in that country.

 

[General Zod]

Well no, there's a free version of Spotify too though. And the artist still gets paid the same amount of money regardless if the user is streaming from a premium account or not. The $10 monthly payments really just go straight to Spotify.

I had been assuming it was those $10 that paid the artists. Is that not the case? Is that $10 going solely to support the additional services that a premium account gets you?

 

[AeonicSlumber]

I had been assuming it was those $10 that paid the artists. Is that not the case? Is that $10 going solely to support the additional services that a premium account gets you?

To be fair, Spotify has not (or will it ever) disclose exactly what goes to what, but since bands make the same % regardless of whether the track was streamed from a premium or standard account, I'm guessing that revenue comes from advertising money. Either way though Spotify takes in the vast majority of the revenue it generates. And for good reason, it's an expensive service to maintain, having offices all over the world, employees, servers, etc.

 

[nailz]

So why not spend your money on a cheap Russian mp3 site instead? As a service, they are fucking fantastic. I want a fucking fantastic service to be successful, so I'll give them my money. Nevermind that the mp3 site is the one making the money....maybe one day, they'll decide to distribute their profits!

AS Pretty much summed up why I'd spend money on Spotify. They have the backing of several record companies and Distro Sites. Like I've been saying, you can't expect a miraculious cure to a problem overnight. It takes early adopters and investors to make a technology functional. "LOL COMPUTERS IN EVERY HOUSE? YAH SURE IF I WANT AN ENTIRE ROOM DEDICATED TO MACHINERY!"

Zod: To get a clearer picture, $10 a month basically lets you listen to the service without ads (and may provide new services, I don't even know). If I used Spotify without a premium account, I'd be listening to a LOT of ads. It's basically on demand internet version of radio. I'd imagine the $10 a month goes to offset the cost of lost ad revenue otherwise generated. There's so many bands and so much music on spotify, it's really no wonder to me how little they actually pay the artists, personally. Still, popularity wins out. The more people play, the more you get paid. Sure, Urban's bands might not make enough to buy a kleenex to cry into, but I'd bet you Lady Gaga/Sony get a comparatively nice size check every month/year/whatever.

I still think the real money from this service is a buy it immediately option from Spotify, where they take a cut of sales from the online vendor who sells music through them, and you all know that's not the first time I've said that.

 

[Rezz]

The $10 per month removes all ads (which I never found to be too onerous - far fewer than Pandora) and, most importantly to me, allows you to stream to devices besides just a computer. On portable devices you can even download content for offline listening.

 

[AngraRULES]

You can also pay $5/month, remove ads AND the 20-hour per month stream limit.

The $10 also as higher-quality streams.

 

[Urban breed]

How much does Spotify make per stream of your song?

That is something they will never tell me. It is as easy for you to look it up as it is for me.

 

[Diabolik]

Exactly why bands work so hard to get on major labels.. just think about the bands that aren't. Where do you think the money comes from, when a band doesn't have a label paying for all this stuff? The band, that's where! So by downloading their music, you are stealing money that was spent by the musicians themselves just to create those tracks. That sucks.

for some...trust funds or rich parents. I know a few.

 

[nailz]

and, most importantly to me, allows you to stream to devices besides just a computer. On portable devices you can even download content for offline listening.

OH, right, yes, this is why it's worth it to me. It's easier to build a playlist in spotify that automagically ends up on every other device than it is with itunes.

 

[AngraRULES]

That is something they will never tell me. It is as easy for you to look it up as it is for me.

Right, but I'm just being curious here. You have more at stake than I, (as you were complaining about Spotify while I found a legal way to avoid illegal downloading and going bankrupt), so you probably should be looking that up more than me. Unless you're not that bothered by it.

Interestingly enough, I haven't heard anyone of the bands I work with complain about Spotify. And let's remember they're not huge by any means...

 

[dcowboys311]

Hmm now this is something I've never seen before and is a neat concept:
http://earache.com/uswebstore/product_info.php/cPath/667_671_72/products_id/1309

For the lazy, notable Metal label Earache Records is celebrating its 25th anniversary by offering a $160 custom-USB drive containing Every. Single. Song. ever released by Earache. Nearly 2k tracks including classic albums from Morbid Angel, Carcass, Napalm Death. Nothing I'd ever buy personally but a neat 'outside-the-box' approach.

 

[AngraRULES]

That was cool indeed.

Though I guarantee some will complain that "in order to fit all of that collection in a 8gb usb drive, the audio quality must nit be that great, therefore not worth it... *sigh*

If other labels did that, I'd buy it... I wonder how the royalty would work for the bands in this case though?

 

[dcowboys311]

OK actually I made a big mistake, it's not EVERY song, in fact there are some pretty glaring omissions, but it's still ~12 songs/dollar.

 

[Urban breed]

Right, but I'm just being curious here. You have more at stake than I

That information is really more than just a little useless to me.

Interestingly enough, I haven't heard anyone of the bands I work with complain about Spotify. And let's remember they're not huge by any means...

Let's also remember that many, many a musician is more than happy to pay to play. Not me. If I do work work I expect to get paid.

As far as complaining goes. There really is no point, is there? Not as far as affecting any real change. The only reason to do so is that instant gratification aspect. Sometimes that is good enough for me. Well, it is all that I have and it does makes me feel better for a few minutes.

Nothing is going to change for the better. This because bands are falling over themselves to work for free. What's worse is that that sort of behavior is spreading into other areas. Not quite to the same degree but it'll get there, I have no doubt. I do not expect anything to change. It never does. People are simply too willing to allow themselves to be exploited. Everyone thinks that they are going to make it big and therefore any sacrifice (including accepting giving away all rights to the result of their hard work) they have made along the way will be worthwhile. When all it really does is give someone else a nice, comfy life.

 

[guardian26]

Do you get to download the songs and save them as mp3 or something with Spotify? Or are you just renting access to whatever you want to listen to?