Posts
RECORD LABELS UNVEIL DREAM OF MONEY FOR NOTHING; WORKING ON CHICKS FOR FREE
Obviously, we're a little too young to recall the collapse of either the Roman or Ottoman Empires, but we're starting to scent that we'll be around to see the end of the RIAA Empire, as they make stupid decision after stupid decision. In an overview of how, exactly, the big labels want to charge people for providing free publicity for their products, Newsweek provides an example or two of just how crazily greedy the music industry is becoming - in recent talks with Yahoo, Warners insisted that not only did they demand a fee everytime someone watched one of their adverts ("pop videos") through Yahoo, they also wanted a slice of the ad revenue on the pages as well.
Ridiculously, and disastorously, Yahoo capitulated - even although this is on a par with a Baked Beans supplier insisting that Tescos not only pays them for the beans, but also gives a share of the profits from the coffee shop on the grounds that without their beans, nobody would be coming to the shop in the first place.
1 comment:
Look what happens when an advertising-supported distribution channel tries to wedge itself in between the brainwashers and the brainwashed.
All parties (except consumers) will eventually go to Congress to sort these issues out.
Radio stations have to pay songwriters based on airplay but do not have to pay the owners of the copyright in the recording itself. Logic or politics?
Note that Yahoo is launching a podcast directory now. Podcasts and streams of artist-owned content have the potential to devastate the majors and hopefully take taste-making out of the majors' control. The same fall in price of production tools that made self-recording so affordable and studio-quality will allow artists to make their own videos and include them in podcasts too.
Post a Comment
As a general rule, posts will only be deleted if they reek of spam.