Artists Strive To Wrest Rights From Music Industry 287
eldavojohn writes "The funny thing about the RIAA & BPI is that the artists are just as tired as the fans with how online music is being handled. So they're trying something new called the Featured Artists' Coalition. FAC's site states in their charter: 'We believe that all music artistes should control their destiny because ultimately it is their art and endeavors that create the pleasure and emotion enjoyed by so many.' As digital releases are increasing, the artists aren't seeing any more money. With the advent of online distribution, are the traditional music industry functions of promotion, samples, radio, and marketing now nothing but costly overhead for the artists? From Iron Maiden to Kate Nash to Radiohead, some big names are backing this new organization."
Death to labels, long live music (Score:5, Informative)
If there is any way that you can help (adding a banner to link to their website, putting flyers up where appropriate, etc), please do.
Re:Well. (Score:2, Informative)
damn publishers! (Score:5, Informative)
and there you have it ladies and gentlemen. The recording industries bullshit lies. Piracy be damned. The reason artists make squat is because the publishes have stolen all the money!
Re:Sorry if this is offtopic but... (Score:2, Informative)
The tags are all messed up in low-bandwidth/no-CSS/no-JS mode, too.
Re:The RIAA doesn't represent ARTISTS? I'm shocked (Score:3, Informative)
So basically whenever "I'm looking for freedom" runs on some station in Germany there's a big check traveling to the US or wherever David Hasselhoff currently lies on the ground trying to eat a burger
Like I said I don't have a clue how the RIAA deals with such issues, but the Gema alone should provide enough incentive to keep the current status.
Re:Stop saying RIAA (Score:2, Informative)
Someone else who thinks that way (Score:3, Informative)
Here's someone else who is also sick of the RIAA and decided to go rogue. Mike Patton with Ipecac Recordings. [ipecac.com]
Total freedom to release anything you want, no multi album contracts so you're not locked in, and royalty checks that favor the artist.
Ipecac is distinguished from most labels (independent labels included) by their policy of signing bands to only one album contracts. "Lawyers or businesspeople call us morons for only doing one-record deals," Werckman scoffs. "They say, 'You're not really anything, then.' Well, we like our catalogue. We like the records we put out. Our bands aren't rushing away. Our job isn't to own any artist. We're here to put out the art that people create."[2]
Ipecac also presses no more than twenty thousand units at a time.[2]
Low overhead and no video or promotional cost partnered with very little distribution costs allow for hearty royalties "Every six months I send those guys the fattest royalty checks," Werckman says. "It's great. It's the way it should be. Even bands that are very successful â" when they get royalty checks from us, they're stunned."
Source. [wikipedia.org]
I'm pleased other people are getting fed up with the RIAA. And I'm *very* pleased they're starting to demonstrate that they are unnecessary.
It won't be long now, I'm thinking.
Proper reverse collation... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:the riaa are never going away (Score:3, Informative)
The point is there is no "business model" that will come after the labels and RIAA. You can't sell free stuff. If it is available for free and 100% of the people know it and can get it for free then there is nothing left to sell.
I don't know anyone that will buy music again. It is available for free and that is how people get it. Trying to build a new business that will get money for music is pointless. iTuens is offering convenience and a brand to people, but even still is making basically zero money. But it keeps iPod users fed and will exist for that purpose as long as possible. I suppose you might be able to sell a service something like that, but I doubt it. In a small number of years the people that equate piracy with theft and aren't willing to steal will be gone. At that point, free is the only game in town.
Re:So does this mean people will stop pirating? (Score:4, Informative)
This is my rationale too - If an artist only gets 25% of my money currently, I'll happily pay them that amount directly (or a little more) as it is cutting out a huge swathe of arseholes all taking a cut and contributing nothing of value.
Having auditioned for an amateur band and listened to their recorded music, I can tell you that good production quality is very important for the resulting listening experience. So some of the assholes are actually of value ;)
That being said, if we donated directly to musicians, and a bit more than they make from sales right now, we could pay for the production indirectly by giving the musicians enough money to buy/hire/loan good production staff and facilities themselves.
There's also marketing: if you don't know the song exists, you're not going to pay for it. That can be fixed on the cheap by teaching everybody to go to $WEBSITE for new music (for some value(s) of website), if possible. That also solves distribution on the cheap.
(maybe the musicians would be overwhelmed by the choices of production staff/facilities and marketing platforms; perhaps they could hire someone dedicated to manage those choices; maybe those kind people could form a company offering their services, including in-house production staff :D)
Re:So does this mean people will stop pirating? (Score:3, Informative)
It's not like piracy didn't exist before the RIAA came into being.
Actually the RIAA did exist before piracy. They existed before digital music, even before cassettes (congress specifically legalized cassette piracy BTW). Their first purpose was to standardize the rollover frequency [wikipedia.org] of records.
Been true all along (Score:3, Informative)
Janis Ian, who us folkies know, and the rest of you don't, and who's been a well-known musician since the sixties, wrote about the RIAA and the music industry when the RIAA came up. Among other things, she noted that many artists make a lot of their income by selling CDs at their own concerts... and are *screwed* by the record companies. "BMG has a strict policy for artists buying their own CDs to sell at concerts - $11 per CD"!!!
So, yeah, if the RIAA did *anything* for the artists, that would be nice. Instead, it *only* does it for the recording industry... and how many times have you read that a poor musician, who (of course) has no health insurance) had to sue the record company for their money? Arlo Guthrie has said that it only took him ->THIRTY YEARS- to "make money" for his record company, so that they'd give him money.
mark