"olds hit millianials with bill cuz they don't get how art is no longer valued"

"olds hit millianials with bill cuz they don't get how art is no longer valued" 

 

 

Spotify Hit With $1.6 Billion Lawsuit From Publisher Representing Tom Petty, Neil Young, Others

 

slsk

They wouldn't be having luxury office spaces and outrageous salaries if they compensated everybody "fairly", would they?

  On 1/3/2018 at 9:29 AM, chim said:

They wouldn't be having luxury office spaces and outrageous salaries if they compensated everybody "fairly", would they?

 

 

yeah.. spotify is some bullshit. most streaming services are. i hope the lawsuit has some teeth to it. we could use a good precedent for streaming services. 

  On 1/4/2018 at 10:27 PM, ignatius said:

 

  On 1/3/2018 at 9:29 AM, chim said:

They wouldn't be having luxury office spaces and outrageous salaries if they compensated everybody "fairly", would they?

 

 

yeah.. spotify is some bullshit. most streaming services are. i hope the lawsuit has some teeth to it. we could use a good precedent for streaming services. 

 

 

as much as I used that service, pay for subscription, etc. I can't feel an iota of empathy for them getting sued. I think it's a matter of when not if before they go tits up

i don't get it, why the hate towards spotify? because they pay artists what they're supposed to earn for a copy of their music that is effortless to make without showering them with money to support their drug habits and ridiculous rock an roll life style?

 

i pirate almost everything but i'll jump on spotify in an instant when if becomes available here.

Edited January 5, 2018 by eugene

lmao “supposed to earn.”

  On 1/5/2018 at 6:21 PM, Alcofribas said:

lmao “supposed to earn.”

 

 

This.

  On 1/5/2018 at 6:32 PM, RSP said:

 

  On 1/5/2018 at 6:21 PM, Alcofribas said:

lmao “supposed to earn.”

 

 

This.

 

 

 

 

  Quote

 

Daniel Ek's first foray into the business world began at age 13 when he started a business making websites for clients from his home. He charged the first client $100, but then charged the next client who asked $200. Eventually, he started charging $5000 per website. To help expand the business, Ek recruited students from his class to work on the websites from the school computer lab by bribing them with video games. His earnings eventually reached $50,000 per month and by age 18 he was managing a team of 25. Ek's parents started to notice his earnings once he started bringing home large TVs. ^[4]

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Poor, persecuted Daniel Ek and his billion and a half dollars of Spotify stock built of a pattern of labor exploitation that started when he was hardly old enough to legally see National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation alone in a theater.

 

 

Those students are us.

it's a shitty company. they don't pay artists well.. it should be comparable to radio but it isn't.  we've all seen the charts and graphs.. need like 5 million plays a month to get minimum wage.. it's dumb. it exploits indie artists etc.. 

 

it's a shitty model.  but most everything is shitty for musicians isn't it? but whatever.. it's all a shit river that never stops flowing... 

Has anyone tried to game it with bots to try and make a killing from spotify?

well how much should they fucking pay? those who criticize it just wont come up with an actual number.

if i made a track that took like 30 hours to come up with using some software and hardware that cost 1000$, how much should i get paid for it? 30$ per hour seems like a decent wage, so something like 3000$ would cover it all pretty well, wouldn't it?

  On 1/5/2018 at 8:37 PM, eugene said:

well how much should they fucking pay? those who criticize it just wont come up with an actual number.

if i made a track that took like 30 hours to come up with using some software and hardware that cost 1000$, how much should i get paid for it? 30$ per hour seems like a decent wage, so something like 3000$ would cover it all pretty well, wouldn't it?

who is paying the hourly wage?

  On 1/5/2018 at 8:37 PM, eugene said:

30$ per hour seems like a decent wage

Instead it's less than a cent per play. Lets say each track is approx 3 mins, using the top end margin of what Spotify contribute to the artist that works out at around 16 cents/hour/user of music played *if* a user listens to your stuff for an hour (which is unlikely)

"We demand free art in a market-based world."

"Anyone who makes lowest-common-denominator pop art to make a living is a sellout with no integrity!"

 

"Why is everything so amateur?  Art sucks now."

Edited January 5, 2018 by autopilot

Fuck'em. Let it burn.

 

  On 1/5/2018 at 8:37 PM, eugene said:

well how much should they fucking pay? those who criticize it just wont come up with an actual number.

if i made a track that took like 30 hours to come up with using some software and hardware that cost 1000$, how much should i get paid for it? 30$ per hour seems like a decent wage, so something like 3000$ would cover it all pretty well, wouldn't it?

 

 

http://5chicago.com/technology/bandcamp-profitable/

 

Given, it's a different business model, but Bandcamp is profitable and doesn't ruthlessly exploit its only product. If Bandcamp were to make a radio-like model, I'm sure each artist would get a fair cut. For instance, give the artist the opportunity to opt-out of streaming plays if they don't feel they're getting a fair share. That would be somewhat analogous to setting the number of times a listener can hear an album before they're forced to buy it.

alco, it doesn't matter. i just come up with a number that would seem fair for a job of that sort.

 

spotify calculation for pay per stream are too convoluted and have many other factors than just number of streams, so i dunno what exactly do you need to do to get 3k$ per track from spotify and how long will it take.

 

when you buy an actual album, you buy the right to infinite plays of that album. but no one plays anything an infinite amount of times, so paying per stream makes much more sense.

What I'm alluding to is that the value for the work is already defined. You just chop it down depending on how the artist values their work being streamed versus how much the user is willing to pay to hear it.

for actual radio play there is a formula that all radio stations use based on agreements with RIAA or whatever organization came up w/it.. .

 

for streaming services it's whatever fits their business model. there is no agreed upon standard. it's each service making contracts with labels or digital aggregators.  

 

until there is an agreed upon royalty amount per play that is equivalent to all 'tiers' of recorded material then there's just not gonna be a fair shake for artists and labels. 

  Quote

it's all about the music

idm man

  On 1/5/2018 at 8:28 PM, Alan Ord said:

Has anyone tried to game it with bots to try and make a killing from spotify?

 

there was this

 

  Quote

 

Upon its release last month, the band asked fans to stream Sleepify continuously at night as they slept, hoping the coordinated effort could morph Spotify's less-than-a-cent royalty rate into something lucrative. And it actually worked: according to Vice, Vulfpeck earned around $20,000 in royalties from the album. Those profits will be used to fund the band's next tour, which will be free to attend and mapped around areas that streamed Sleepify the most. But now the clever stunt has been cut short.