Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by chivalc, May 4, 2005.

  1. chivalc

    chivalc Guest


    How much money Apple might be paying to the record companies for every
    track downloaded by Apple's customers. What might be basis of money
    sharing between them????

    Any ideas?

    chivalc, May 4, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. chivalc

    marks542004 Guest

    I have no idea whatever but assuming it is something like the Walmart
    downloads (about 90cents a track).

    If the store (walmart/ apple/ etc) are paying all the costs of the
    download servers, payment by credit card, customer service calls etc
    any mony to the recording company is mostly profit.
    marks542004, May 4, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. chivalc

    Bill Van Dyk Guest

    Now, now-- don't jump to conclusions there. The record company still
    has to pay their lawyers, accountants, accounting consultants, tax
    consultants, image consultants, make-up designers, costumers,
    choreographers, hair-dressers, film-makers, personal trainers,
    directors, cinematographers, drivers, limosine companies, caterers,
    private jet, downtown office space, and so on, all out of their piddly
    share of that .99.

    And oh yes-- the artist, of course. You don't want to put the artist
    out of work, do you? See-- look at how many jobs will be lost if we all
    don't stop stealing music.
    Bill Van Dyk, May 4, 2005
  4. chivalc

    nap Guest

    I used to have this discussion with my , now 21 year old son when he was a
    teen and in April his first album was released. When I asked how he felt
    that the record was already being shared online, before it was released, he
    had a different view of this whole thing than he had when he was younger.
    nap, May 4, 2005
  5. chivalc

    Bill Van Dyk Guest

    I suspect that a lot of young musicians will be flattered the first time
    they see their music being downloaded on the web.

    I suspect that some of them may pay attention to the fact that some
    musicians testifying at the Supreme Court hearings on file-sharing
    software have insisted that they sold more CD's by exposing their music
    through downloads than they ever did with the "promotion" and support of
    their record company. That's not a trivial fact.

    I would prefer a model where all music is available from any single
    iTunes-like provider for a reasonable monthly fee. But until the
    dinosaurs that run the recording industry wake up in the 21st century, I
    have no sympathy for the RIAA. They are still kicking and screaming,
    and if it was up to them, we'd all be paying $4.95 a song and artists
    would get nothing.

    I hope, for his own sake, your son reads carefully about what happened
    to Tom Petty, the Counting Crows, Michelle Shocked, T-Bone Burnett,
    etc., etc., etc., etc., and their struggles with the music industry.
    That said, I can understand why a young artist would be very reluctant
    to challenge a music executive's insistence that the terms of the
    contract are non-negotiable. You don't think there's a zillion other
    kids who want to be a recording artist?
    Bill Van Dyk, May 4, 2005
  6. chivalc

    nap Guest

    Not if they are supposed to make a living from the proceeds. But it is a
    complex issue marketing-wise. Some think it is an advantage.
    I can tell you for sure that only 8% of musicians under 25 have any idea
    what the Supreme Court even is.
    not a trivial fact either. !

    There are just as many or more artists and companies trying to salvage
    spiraling sales while coming to grips with these new delivery vehicles. Of
    course, people testifying in front of the Supreme Court will be those with
    an investment in the agenda.

    And while there are many people who can find good reasons for it, piracy is
    piracy. Intillectual material should be protected.
    All of those people control their own destiny. And they've all made good
    money doing it. I hate to hear them whine so much.

    He's not new at it though. We've been talking about it and dealing with it
    in some form or another all his life. His mom has a record that's been
    selling for years and I have had a hand in a lot of projects over the last
    25 years.

    Not sure what you mean there. Contracts are negotiated heavily with lawyers
    on both sides. Their record company is making every effort to take advantage
    of any media or technology that will help their artists. I don't look at
    music 'executives' as one type of person. There are all kinds.
    nap, May 9, 2005
  7. chivalc

    kashe Guest

    How does he feel about his compensation from the current owner
    of the copyright?
    kashe, May 11, 2005
  8. chivalc

    kashe Guest

    I was also recently surprised to hear of one of the cheesy
    tactics used by the reording companies.

    A fairly well known (but not so well that I can remember his
    name) musician decided he was being underpaid, even given the
    byzantine formulas used by music companies to *cough* compensate
    *cough* artists. They stonewalled for years to keep him from reviewing
    their records. When finally forced to do so, they were found to have
    grossly underpaid him. Win for him? Hardly. They dragged things out in
    the courts for further years "negotiating" what they'd finally have to
    pay him. In the end, he got about half what they'd screwed him out of,
    then had the use of his money for all those years. Screw the **AA.
    kashe, May 11, 2005
  9. chivalc

    Bill Van Dyk Guest

    You've described well the story of dozens of artists.

    Tom Petty may be one of the most well-known because he refused to roll
    over for them, and he was actually able to get out from under a very bad
    contract deal (for him) by declaring bankruptcy. Once the RIAA realized
    the implications of this, they took their congressmen out for dinner,
    made the proper donations to the right PACs, and were gratified to get
    invited by Congress to pretty well write their own revisions to the
    legislation (Congress didn't bother to get any input from Tom Petty or
    any other artists) to make it almost impossible for other artists to
    make the same escape.

    I believe that many RIAA executives honestly believe that they
    "manufacture" music, and the parts-- especially the talent-- are
    interchangeable. If Bob Dylan arrived in New York today instead of
    1961, he would go exactly nowhere. Or, more likely, he'd be on an
    independent label, like Ani Difranco.
    Bill Van Dyk, May 11, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.