The Rethink Music initiative recently published a report on “Fair Music: Transparency and Money Flows in the Music Industry”. The report identifies barriers in the money flows to artist and states:”[O]nly a small proportion of the money beyond the initial recording advances ultimately makes its way to artists as ongoing revenue.” (Rethink Music, 2015: 3). Especially in the digitized recorded music business the revenue streams are often obscure and non-transparent. And if it comes to music streaming, artists are sceptical about the underlying business model. Based on the report’s finding, the revenue streams from music streaming and the structures behind the business are analysed.
Posts Tagged ‘copyright
Tags: artist income, ASCAP, Believe Digital, BMI, collecting society, composer, content aggregator, copyright, Deezer, Harry Fox Agency, iHeartRadio, income distribution, income of musicians, master right, mechanical right, MRO, music publisher, music streaming, musical copyright, Pandora, performance right, performer, PRO, rdio, Rebeat, record labels, revenue distribution, SESAC, Sirus XM, songwriter, sound recording right, SoundExchange, Spotify, streaming income, streaming revenue, The Orchard
Tags: advertising, April 2012, Carsten Winter, co-creation, context, copyright, copyright term, copyright term extension, copyright term reversion, Dennis Collopy, IJMBR, International Journal of Music Business Research, Martin Kretschmer, media, music, music distribution, music industry, ownership, Patrik Wikström, Peter Tschmuck, Pinie Wang, term reversion, USA, value creation
One might wonder if there is a need for an academic journal on the music business. Several high-profile trade publications on the music business are published regularly and in the torrent of academic journals one can find titles that focus on popular music, the creative industries, cultural economics and arts management. Nevertheless, there is a gap for a publication wholly dedicated to the academic research of music business and industry topics. The International Journal of Music Business Research (IJMBR) tries to fill this gap by providing a new platform for publication of articles on the phenomena of the music economy from different scientific perspectives.
The first issue of the IJMBR reflects a wide range of music business research topics that fit within the scope of the journal’s remit. In a theoretical piece, Patrik Wikström argues that the economic value created from recorded music is increasingly based on context rather than on ownership and that the focus of music distribution should shift from download and streaming to contextual models of music experience. The second paper is contributed by Pinie Wang, who highlights, in a historical analysis, the complex inter-relationship between the US media, advertising and music industries. Martin Kretschmer then addresses his contribution to the recent EU-copyright term extension for sound recordings, proposing that copyright interests should be transferable only for an initial term of 10 years, after which they will revert to the creator. This should lead to a remarkable decrease in orphaned work and should foster creativity and innovation.
Click here for the first issue of the International Journal of Music Business Research (IJMBR)
If you want to submit an article for publication in the IJMBR please send it to: email@example.com
On November 23, 2011 the British music manager and record producer Peter Jenner gave a talk on the digital revolution in the music industry and the need for an International Music Registry (IMR) at the Institute of Culture Management and Culture Studies (IKM) of the University of Music and Performing Arts Vienna. Peter Jenner has managed Pink Floyd, T Rex, Ian Dury, Roy Harper, The Clash, The Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy, Robyn Hitchcock, Baaba Maal and Eddi Reader (Fairground Attraction), Billy Bragg and others. He works at Sincere Management and was the Secretary General of the International Music Managers’ Forum, a director of the UK Music Managers’ Forum and is involved on the advisory board of the Featured Artists Coalition. Currently he is a consultant for the World Intellectual Property Rights Organization (WIPO) to help in the development of an International Music Registry. More on this project and the rationale behind it can be read in the following abridged version of Peter Jenner’s talk, which was not only authorised but also edited by himself.
On September 12, 2011 the EU Council of Ministers passed the copyright term extension in sound recordings from 50 to 70 years, which was proposed by the European Commission in 2008 and voted on by the European Parliament in 2009. The term extension was welcomed by the music industry bodies and several musicians. The newly appointed IFPI chairman Plácido Domingo called the extension great news for performing artists which “(…) reflects the important role performers play in success of songs by narrowing the gap between the protection offered to recorded performances and that offered to compositions.” IFPI CEO Frances Moore added that “The extension of the term of protection to 70 years (…) improves the conditions for investment in new talent.” In first statements U2 manager Paul McGuiness and ABBA’s Björn Ulvaeus applauded to the EU decision.
On the other hand, the extension is criticized by open access activists, but also by most of the academics in the field of intellectual property rights. In an open statement to the European Parliament the who-is-who of IP-law professors and economists, including Nobel laureats Sir James Mirrlees and Kenneth Arrow, opposed the copyright term extension as an ineffective and unnecessary extension of monopoly rights in 2008.
Thus, the question arises, what is the economic rational for such a term extension? What are arguments and counter-arguments and how they can be assessed by economic theory?
In April 2010 the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report to the Committee of Judiciary of the U.S. Senate as well as House of Representatives entitled “Intellectual Property. Observations on Efforts to Quantify the Economic Effects of Counterfeit and Pirated Goods“. Although the report is foced on counterfeiting it also deals with the infringement of intellectual property right (aka “digital piracy”). In the following you can read more about the key findings of the report. Continue reading ‘GAO report on the economic impact of “piracy”’