Artists' managers, royalty collectors turn on iTunes

Download payments too low, they claim


Having lauded the arrival of legal music download services likes Apple's iTunes for saving it from online piracy, the music industry is now complaining that the digital domain is not sufficiently recompensing artists.

According to a report in today's Times newspaper, the Music Managers Forum (MMF), a trade body of artists' representatives, are bemoaning the 4.5p performers make out of every 79p iTunes download. That figure, which translates into a rate of six per cent is half the rate they get from physical singles.

“Sale prices and royalties have gradually been eroded to the point where an artist needs to sell in excess of 1.5m units before they can show a profit, after paying for recording time and tour support," Jazz Summers, MMF chairman and manager of Snow Patrol, told the paper.

Separately, the Mechanical Copyright Protection Society (MCPS) and the Performing Rights Society (PRS) both want to up the writer's royalty to 12 per cent from today's 8.5 per cent rate, though they have said they are willing to knock it down to eight per cent cent for the next two years for new services.

Summers' comment echoes a point made recently by Tim Clark, co-founder of ie:music, the company that represents Robbie Williams and others. Clark told a meeting convened by industry networking organisation MusicTank that iTunes was giving most artists just 3-4p per download.

For all his complaints about iTunes and Steve Jobs, Clark's problem really lies with the labels. iTunes, Napster, Virgin Digital, Wippit and co. are all retailers - performance royalties are negotiated by the labels and artists' managers, not by the retailers.

That's something Summers appears to appreciate: he said recording companies had been "caught with their pants down" by the legal download services. Fearing the illegal download arena, they quickly accepted the pricing dictated to them by Apple and co.

Now they're beginning to feel short-changed - witness last month's comment from Warner Music CEO Edgar Bronfman that Apple's uniform pricing policy is unfair, and should be replaced with a differential pricing plan, typically with new material costing more than older, back-catalogue songs.

Of course, that's still not going to benefit the artists, many of whom are awaiting the end of their current recording contracts with labels so they can negotiate better download royalties. In some cases, it can be argued that if managers were more astute, many artists would already have better royalty arrangements than they do today.

Market size

It's also worth mentioning at this point that while Apple is singled out for most of the blame - after all, it owns more than 80 per cent of the UK, if not global, digital music download market - the segment in which it's a player only accounts for a few percentage points of the overall music market. Factor in all the products sold that have a music connection - including hi-fi kit, media and, yes, iPods - its an even smaller percentage.

Again, that puts the emphasis on getting ready for the time when it's a much more important part of the business. Clark said he believes that stage is going to come much sooner than most people believe. Indeed, he let slip that Robbie Williams' £80m four-album recording contract with EMI, signed in 2002, is timed to come to end just as the download market really starts to take off.

How good Clark's timing is will determine how successfully Williams can leverage the digital music market. It's up to other artists' managers to similarly plan ahead. Given how easy it is for indies to partner directly with iTunes and so on, that could lead to significant trouble for the labels, certainly if the established acts, who largely bankroll everything else the labels do, choose to cut their own download deals.

Worse, newer acts may choose the direct route too. Paying for recording is the same whether the result is a download or a physical single, said Alun Taylor, MD of indie label Roots Music Group, but a download is a lot cheaper to offer and far less risky than putting out a potentially unsuccessful physical single. ®


Other stories you might like

  • Will Lenovo ever think beyond hardware?
    Then again, why develop your own software à la HPE GreenLake when you can use someone else's?

    Analysis Lenovo fancies its TruScale anything-as-a-service (XaaS) platform as a more flexible competitor to HPE GreenLake or Dell Apex. Unlike its rivals, Lenovo doesn't believe it needs to mimic all aspects of the cloud to be successful.

    While subscription services are nothing new for Lenovo, the company only recently consolidated its offerings into a unified XaaS service called TruScale.

    On the surface TruScale ticks most of the XaaS boxes — cloud-like consumption model, subscription pricing — and it works just like you'd expect. Sign up for a certain amount of compute capacity and a short time later a rack full of pre-plumbed compute, storage, and network boxes are delivered to your place of choosing, whether that's a private datacenter, colo, or edge location.

    Continue reading
  • Intel is running rings around AMD and Arm at the edge
    What will it take to loosen the x86 giant's edge stranglehold?

    Analysis Supermicro launched a wave of edge appliances using Intel's newly refreshed Xeon-D processors last week. The launch itself was nothing to write home about, but a thought occurred: with all the hype surrounding the outer reaches of computing that we call the edge, you'd think there would be more competition from chipmakers in this arena.

    So where are all the AMD and Arm-based edge appliances?

    A glance through the catalogs of the major OEMs – Dell, HPE, Lenovo, Inspur, Supermicro – returned plenty of results for AMD servers, but few, if any, validated for edge deployments. In fact, Supermicro was the only one of the five vendors that even offered an AMD-based edge appliance – which used an ageing Epyc processor. Hardly a great showing from AMD. Meanwhile, just one appliance from Inspur used an Arm-based chip from Nvidia.

    Continue reading
  • NASA's Psyche mission: 2022 launch is off after software arrives late
    Launch window slides into 2023 or 2024 for asteroid-probing project

    Sadly for NASA's mission to take samples from the asteroid Psyche, software problems mean the spacecraft is going to miss its 2022 launch window.

    The US space agency made the announcement on Friday: "Due to the late delivery of the spacecraft's flight software and testing equipment, NASA does not have sufficient time to complete the testing needed ahead of its remaining launch period this year, which ends on October 11."

    While it appears the software and testbeds are now working, there just isn't enough time to get everything done before a SpaceX Falcon Heavy sends the spacecraft to study a metallic-rich asteroid of the same name.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022