Well, the greater issue is that these royalties killed off personal Internet Radio Stations and drove them underground (or at least, to Shoutcast, which sort of exists semi- underground). I would have happily paid anywhere from $100-$500 a year for an Internet license to broadcast legally to probably no more than a handful of people at a time. But no little guy could afford the royalties at the established rate. Pandora still hasn't made a profit, it's just funneling $50 million or so a year to the record labels, which is the way they like it. It's easier to run a pirate FM radio station! The FCC only looks for you if someone complains!
Well, it's all a fight by traditional publishers and record companies to delay the inevitable. Eventually, books will be written AND published by their authors (except for maybe a small group of future Stephen Kings) and promoted by retailers like Amazon and iTunes, cutting out publishers (and with it, the 90% of profits they take). With print on demand, anyone who wants a paper version could still order one. But publishers will be unnecessary.
I have to say I agree with the Levin estate on this one. The author purposely did not want to hit audiences over the head with the gay subplot. Obviously, that wasn't enough for the LA Gay & Lesbian Center which wanted to remove all doubt. And then because it couldn't do what it wanted, it canceled the production. The Center can do its production when the play goes into the public domain 70 or so years from now.
About 95% of everything printed is never reprinted and those works are being kept out of the public domain by the 5% that do get reprinted. And of that, probably less than 1% of works actually generate any substantial income, so 99% of works are being held hostage for 95 years by the 1% that actually generate any money through the years. It's not a fair system.
As several people have noted, I can't believe UStream instituted a program that they themselves couldn't shut off in time to restore the Hugo Awards stream. You should never give an automated program that much power!
Gee, I just wanted to operate a "legal" not-for-profit hobby online radio station and by 1998 it was basically made illegal. I wish I had millions of dollars to try to come up with a create way to get around the copyright laws.
The thing people don't consider is that the CD and DVD departments of movie studios and recording companies are run by people with experience in retail. They only think in terms of manufacturing, distribution and retail selling. They don't understand the Internet or how to make money from streaming. And they're also trying to protect their turf, because if a studio goes all streaming, then it won't need factories, trucks, warehouses OR THEM! I think that's what this really is about. A streaming model hands all the power over to high-tech guys with a different skill set. A lot of people will lose their high-paying jobs and their power within the business. That leads to a lot of screaming about falling DVD and CD sales and how the sky is falling.
If the studios and record companies could clear themselves of the retailers in their organizations, they could figure out another business model to bring in money. We've seen this before. When VHS was introduced, the executives in the theatrical rental department were the ones screaming against home video, and the MPAA sued instead of jumping on that new platform. It took the porn market to show the movie industry that tons of money could be made through home video.
The secret to success for the movie industry might be to put out blockbuster films steadily through the year and allow people to stream from day one instead of ganging up blockbusters in the summer and holiday seasons. Most of a film's money is made in the first couple of weeks of release. Let everyone who wants to see a film see it any way they want, either in a movie theater (maybe in 3D), at home, or on their iPads. By the time the revenue from that movie runs out in four weeks, then release the next blockbuster. Each studio then needs to put out 12 blockbusters a month and then fill in with some little films like teen horror flicks, romantic comedies, and so forth. If the studios did it right, they could have $100 million or more flow into their coffers every month and not have to worry about piracy!
Some people have commented about the low price GameStop will pay for used games and then mark them up 100% and sell them. But 100% mark up is the standard mark up for retail organizations. You have to think of the costs involved in running a store. Rent alone can cost between 5%-20% of gross sales. (Mall rent is towards the higher end.) Likewise employees can cost between 5%-20%. There's also utilities, taxes, accounting costs, technology costs. Additionally, for the company, there's the cost of opening new stores and the cost of closing down non-performing stores or subsidizing unprofitable stores. So 100% markup is fairly reasonable especially for a store where the average purchase is probably around $60.
Most of the commenters above are correct, however, it is an opinion piece, and it's a time-honored tradition of opinion pieces to inspire rebuttals and letters to the editors saying that the writer didn't know what he was talking about. Opinion pieces have never been held to the same standard as news articles, although I would have thought the editor should have done some research and rejected the piece if the fact were too far afield.
The issue of free news versus paid news is more of a newspaper cultural thing. Paid newspapers have always looked down their noses at free "advertisers" as traditional newspapers would call them. But the free newspapers is actually the only segment of the news market that's growing. They can be hyper local with their stories and their ads. But the paid newspapers are still fighting the notion of giving away their product for free and it could be their downfall.
Also, I know many journalism graduates who couldn't get work at traditional newspapers and are writing online instead. Does that make them any less journalists? You can be a journalist without working for a newspaper.
jupiterkansas had a good comment about Hollywood buying up anything on the Internet that becomes successful. We're seeing that in the publishing business. Publishing companies are buying up successful e-books like 50 Shades of Gray to keep readers from looking for them online. And publishers don't want more writers like JK Rawling selling their books themselves online.
As has been pointed out here before, a recording artist can make as much money selling two iTunes songs than they could for an entire album's worth of material from the record companies. So the recording companies give huge contracts to the Lady Gagas of the world to keep them from selling directly to consumers. But the genie may already be out of the bottle!
Both Pandora and Spotify are basically working for the record companies. Both companies are giving over 60% of their revenue just for royalties and both companies are still losing money because the royalty model is unsustainable. Britain had pirate radio stations because stations couldn't make money while also paying the music performance royalties. How long can Pandora and Spotify hold out under the current fee schedule?
Let Taplin keep putting his foot in his mouth! He'll wind up like the global warming people who put out so much misinformation (New York City should be under water by now) that people stopped taking them seriously. Taplin's with the recording companies not the artists!
On the post: Universal And Fox Sued Over Simpson's Theme Park Ride... By A Musicians' Union
Banned
On the post: Digital River Loses Patent Suit Despite Doing What Was In The Patent Two Years Before Patent Was Filed
Testify
On the post: Senator Wyden Introduces Bill To Bring Some Sanity To Webcasting Royalty Rates
Death of Internet Radio
On the post: Publishers Can't Seem To Celebrate The Ebook Boom Without Slipping In Odes To Copyright
Inevitable
On the post: This Is What's Wrong With The Music Industry: Musicians Have To Pay To Pay Themselves
Bootlegs
On the post: Dead Authors' Estates Preventing Even The Slightest Revisions To Works
Not minor changes
On the post: Copyright Killbots Strike Again: Official DNC Livestream Taken Down By Just About Every Copyright Holder
Uber Kill Bot
On the post: Why Does Copyright Last 70 Years After Death... But Licenses Expire At Death?
Copyright Hostages
On the post: Copyright Enforcement Bots Seek And Destroy Hugo Awards
Can't shut it off
On the post: How Copyright Has Driven Online Streaming Innovators Insane
Online Radio
On the post: The DVD Is Dying. Hollywood's Plan? Do Nothing And Cede Ground To File Sharing
Retailers
If the studios and record companies could clear themselves of the retailers in their organizations, they could figure out another business model to bring in money. We've seen this before. When VHS was introduced, the executives in the theatrical rental department were the ones screaming against home video, and the MPAA sued instead of jumping on that new platform. It took the porn market to show the movie industry that tons of money could be made through home video.
The secret to success for the movie industry might be to put out blockbuster films steadily through the year and allow people to stream from day one instead of ganging up blockbusters in the summer and holiday seasons. Most of a film's money is made in the first couple of weeks of release. Let everyone who wants to see a film see it any way they want, either in a movie theater (maybe in 3D), at home, or on their iPads. By the time the revenue from that movie runs out in four weeks, then release the next blockbuster. Each studio then needs to put out 12 blockbusters a month and then fill in with some little films like teen horror flicks, romantic comedies, and so forth. If the studios did it right, they could have $100 million or more flow into their coffers every month and not have to worry about piracy!
On the post: Netflix Provides 'Knock-offs' After Contract With Disney Ends
Nothing
On the post: Gamestop Offers Glimpse Into Their Used-Games Facility
Retail Model
On the post: When WSJ Flunks Internet History, Blogs Step In To Educate
Opinion piece
On the post: Pro-Copyright Judges Never Drop Cases Over Conflicts, So Why Does Megaupload Judge Have To Step Down?
Fix is in!
On the post: Judge Slams Universal Music For Trying To 'Bamboozle' Court & Producers Over Eminem Royalties
Great news
On the post: If Newspapers Had Never Offered Free News Online... They Would Still Be Failing
Cultural
Also, I know many journalism graduates who couldn't get work at traditional newspapers and are writing online instead. Does that make them any less journalists? You can be a journalist without working for a newspaper.
On the post: Hollywood & The RIAA Won't Let Tech Save Them
Monopolies
As has been pointed out here before, a recording artist can make as much money selling two iTunes songs than they could for an entire album's worth of material from the record companies. So the recording companies give huge contracts to the Lady Gagas of the world to keep them from selling directly to consumers. But the genie may already be out of the bottle!
On the post: Myth Dispensing: The Whole 'Spotify Barely Pays Artists' Story Is Bunk
Working for the record companies
On the post: Why Do The People Who Always Ask Us To 'Respect' Artists Seem To Have So Little Respect For Artists?
Let Taplin keep putting his foot in his mouth!
Next >>