Spotify, Google, Pandora, and Amazon have all teamed up to appeal a ruling by the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board that will increase royalties paid to songwriters by 44 percent, reports Variety.
In a joint statement, the companies, which all operate major streaming music services, said that the decision harms both music licensees and copyright owners.
/article-new/2018/05/apple-music-note-800x420.jpg?lossy)
"The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), in a split decision, recently issued the U.S. mechanical statutory rates in a manner that raises serious procedural and substantive concerns. If left to stand, the CRB's decision harms both music licensees and copyright owners. Accordingly, we are asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review the decision."
Apple is not joining the other streaming music services and will not appeal the decision. According to Variety, songwriter organizations have been heavily praising Apple while condemning the other streaming services.
David Israelite, CEO of the National Music Publishers' association, called the appeals from Spotify, Pandora, Google and Amazon "tech bullies who do not respect or value the songwriters who make their businesses possible."
He also thanked Apple Music for not participating in the appeal and for "continuing to be a friend to songwriters."
Top Rated Comments
Anyway, I'm happy to see that Apple is on the better side of this situation.
1. Let the others fight and if they win Apple benefits as well.
2. By not going against the raise legally, they keep the relationship with artists and labels in good standing which could more than likely prove beneficial in the long run.
Smart move...
What about the struggling artists who actually created the content?
You're wrong. Streaming services generally do not negotiate royalties directly with individual artists.
I didn't say they directly negotiate royalties with artists; I only said they pay out the most royalties (I didn't mention to who, though, but I assume it's to the music labels (Sony BMG, Universal Music, etc.)), though, if I'm wrong about that, then please correct me.Could you highlight where I was wrong so I have a better understanding of what you were talking about?
well sure. they have more money in the bank so they can afford to be generous. It's like Fox TV network keeping a show with borderline ratings (but very vocal fans on social media) because they have stacks of profit from American Idol to cover the losses.
Fox is notorious for cancelling shows with small but dedicated followings. (Firefly the most notable, Brooklyn 9-9 the most recent.)and it makes them look good in the eyes of the public