Not sure I have any opinion on it one way or the other. I don't know the details there. If that's a big problem, why would the various indies just say "don't talk to me, talk to Merlin" and then the issue would be solved?
See my above answer to Gwiz. In short the importance of having Merlin is to ensure that the diverse indie community can get the same deals as majors so they can continue their contribution to both artistic and commercial growth in the music sector.
Can you explain this one further? From what I've heard, the rates aren't that far off from other services.
The rates are as in your table above. What worries me is that the existing platforms' royalties are at a level where even artists that are great at RTB, getting themselves onto playlists etc. need to have streams in the millions per year to see digital music sales as a substantial add-on to other revenues from their careers such as live fees, sync etc.
I come from Scandinavia where streaming is the far biggest music format of all, also over downloads & CDs. Which I love though my own royalties as an artist are significantly lower than a few years back, and despite the investments I make as a label manager takes way longer to make back in sales. What the Scandinavian market has proved is that the consumers are willing to pay for streaming - and services like spotify etc. have found a subscription fee-level satisfactory to the majority of both rights holders and consumers (hardly anyone streams via stuff like last.fm, grooveshark etc. and even youtube streams have staggered and declined for many of us). But with YouTube pushing rates 10-20% in the 'wrong' direction I really fear the other services will be forced to follow and set us all years back financially in the streaming market.
True, Merlin aren't rightsholders - but they are still the indies' Rights Agency despite not owning the rights themselves.
While there are only three majors there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of indies (which is why Merlin exists) and all other major services make their deals in collaboration with both majors & Merlin. I simply can't see the reason for YouTube not to talk to Merlin except if they don't want to or can't do so while honouring their deals with the majors.
Excuse me if I've overlooked something in your posts on this matter, but I'd love to hear your stand on the following:
- the lack of negotiations with Merlin, while having negotiated with majors - the possible effects of the world's biggest streaming service lowering royalty rates. My thinking is that other services might follow and as a consequence music streaming will devalue overall.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Kristoffer Rom.
Re: Re: Re: indie disadvantages
All quotes from WIN, Merlin & Impala I've seen state that Merlin hasn't been contacted.
Re: Re: indie disadvantages
See my above answer to Gwiz. In short the importance of having Merlin is to ensure that the diverse indie community can get the same deals as majors so they can continue their contribution to both artistic and commercial growth in the music sector.
Can you explain this one further? From what I've heard, the rates aren't that far off from other services.
The rates are as in your table above. What worries me is that the existing platforms' royalties are at a level where even artists that are great at RTB, getting themselves onto playlists etc. need to have streams in the millions per year to see digital music sales as a substantial add-on to other revenues from their careers such as live fees, sync etc.
I come from Scandinavia where streaming is the far biggest music format of all, also over downloads & CDs. Which I love though my own royalties as an artist are significantly lower than a few years back, and despite the investments I make as a label manager takes way longer to make back in sales. What the Scandinavian market has proved is that the consumers are willing to pay for streaming - and services like spotify etc. have found a subscription fee-level satisfactory to the majority of both rights holders and consumers (hardly anyone streams via stuff like last.fm, grooveshark etc. and even youtube streams have staggered and declined for many of us). But with YouTube pushing rates 10-20% in the 'wrong' direction I really fear the other services will be forced to follow and set us all years back financially in the streaming market.
Makes sense?
Re: Re: indie disadvantages
While there are only three majors there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of indies (which is why Merlin exists) and all other major services make their deals in collaboration with both majors & Merlin. I simply can't see the reason for YouTube not to talk to Merlin except if they don't want to or can't do so while honouring their deals with the majors.
indie disadvantages
Excuse me if I've overlooked something in your posts on this matter, but I'd love to hear your stand on the following:
- the lack of negotiations with Merlin, while having negotiated with majors
- the possible effects of the world's biggest streaming service lowering royalty rates. My thinking is that other services might follow and as a consequence music streaming will devalue overall.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Kristoffer Rom.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt