Adapting to the Digital Culture: Rethinking Rights and Compensation within the Music Industry

Copyright law, which manages much of the music business industry, tries to maintain a balance concerning the rights of the creator, and the common good in an attempt to drive society forward. In essence, the

Is important for anyone who has created any intellectual property to protect it. In the music industry, in order for someone to protect their work, they must obtain a copyright. Music has been around before anyone could obtain a copyright and when the invention of the computer came along it made it easier for someone to steal another artist's intellectual property with the help of the internet. This paper will cover what events have taken a big role in copyright protection for artist, the consequences if someone was to break the rules of a copyright which is called copyright infringement, and how will a copyright hold in the future. Were copyrights enacted without the thought of life changing technology, and how can some music companies

The purpose of the copyright system has always been to promote creativity in society and protect the creators’ interests. In applying copyright laws to any creation, three basic guidelines apply. First is the fair return for a creators labor, second is “Fair Use” of the creators’ labor and finally the Progress of Science and useful Arts to further the public good. The application of these three guidelines in litigation for A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, found that the rights of reproduction, and distribution had been violated, in effect upholding the copyrights of nineteen different music companies represented under A&M Records name, this ruling had protected the music industries interests. However it would seem that the publishing industry would not be so lucky, litigation in Authors’ Guild vs. Google ruled that Google’s actions constituted fair use. Under these two scenarios’ the copyright laws’ have, effectively, protected the rights of music artists’, protected the public’s right to “fair use” and sparked new opportunities for creative growth. However, lawmakers continue to struggle to define copyright boundaries between the public’s right of use and the creators right to profit from their efforts.

Figure 3 Flow chart showing the change in the way music is distributed with the entrance of new actors such as streaming services (Oestricher & Kuzma, 2009)

The internet has made it easier for music to be sold online. On our smartphones, we have the apple store and the play store where music is purchased and downloaded daily. It has also made it easier for people to download and share music files without paying for it. The Maverick Recording Co. v. Harper case highlights this issue.

For the musician, technology and copyright laws are some of the most beneficial aspects of their profession. In fact, technology has assisted musicians in distributing, listening to, and performing music. Those ways can also help the musician academically or financially. Compared to centuries ago, the musician can now distribute music in various ways, not just by paper. Nevertheless, copyright laws came into existence in the sixteenth century as well, have also benefited the musician. Over time these laws have focused more on the musician instead of patrons and printers exploiting money from the musician. Thus, copyright laws of today and improvement of technology have become beneficial to musicians compared to centuries ago. This paper

No one can deny that technology is actively changing the music industry. Production, distribution and sales of music have been affected dramatically within the last 10 years along with artists, composers, and technicians. Most of the changes have been great for consumers, but vastly negative for professionals in the music industry, however a few artists have found ways to adapt to the changing atmosphere of digitally downloaded music and use it to their advantage. We’ve seen music change form from physical, tangible products like records and CD’s to electronic single tracks stored in an invisible cloud. Two major factors in this sudden revolution are online music stores (specifically iTunes) and file sharing websites that allow music to be downloaded illegally.

Introduction: Setting the trend for the future, the distribution and consumption of recorded music transformed dramatically with the launching of Apple’s iTunes in 2001. The proliferation of online music subscription services and other music sharing services exerted a great pressure on the conventional music distribution business model. Combined with this transformation, piracy of digital music had a profound impact on the whole industry. These worsening conditions in the market place for recorded music forced both established and upcoming new artists to experiment with new ways of selling their music.

Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.

From the early days of the internet, Napster first introduced the globe to digital music with easy accessibility, and has been morphing and developing with time. With hefty copyright lawsuits underway, a number of successors have reattempted to design music-sharing platforms that acquiesce to consumer demands, while also limiting the damage to artists and the music industry as a whole. With a number of well-recognizable investors and supporters, Spotify emerged in 2008 and had arguably grown into the most formidable entity in the realms of digital music.

In the midst of the United States’ “dot com bubble” (years 1997-2000), there was a surge in technology that brought about file sharing and digital downloads. Threatening the survival of the music industry and introducing a unique set of challenges for the industry to overcome. To remain relevant in the new global market of digital music online, the music industry would have to evolve and change with the introduction of each new facet technology had to offer. The introduction of digitally compressed music files, so easily attainable for a small fee or downloaded legally (pirated) for free, made the music industry reevaluate how to make a profit and protect copyrights. Social media created a visible opportunity for both consumers and artists to maintain digital relationships while providing a platform for consumers to follow and discover new musicians and bands, naturally, making the internet a promotional medium for artists. As the corner record shops closed to make way for virtual storefronts and instant downloads; the internet, digital downloading, and social media made an enormous impact on the music industry that has changed the way consumers purchase, source, listen to, and produce music today.

Spotify, along with other streaming sites have generated debate around current copyright laws. Spotify launched in 2008, is a relatively new technology that the legal world is yet to catch up with, the last update was the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, established ten years prior (guardian.com, 1).In his discussion of new

On the other hand, it has been found by some legit sources that YouTube could actually not stop piracy and digital content that’s copyrighted. For example, (Ernesto, 2011) claimed the Electrical and musical industries music chief financial officer Paul Kahn said during the Lime Wire trial that his record label EMI receives only half a penny for each YouTube play by a YouTube viewer/user. Also, music industry group International federation of the phonographic industry write that at the end of 2010, the major record labels received only 1.7 billion views per every month, and this number is going up and increasing rather quickly. The amount of compensation that the artists and record labels receive for video uploads and views on popular sites like YouTube are only half of the number of hits. With free music available to listen to and view on YouTube many people are less likely to pirate,

The evolution of the music industry follows the familiar pattern of digitization. Innovation began with the introduction of the vinyl record, transitioned from the cassette tape to the compact disc and landed us in an era of digital downloads. The emergence of music streaming services like Spotify has progressed the industry even further, giving consumers the ability to access music on demand using download-free online platforms. Spotify faces criticism from artists as a result of the overlap of creativity and commerce. They argue that business activities corrupt creativity, transforming it into a tool for profitability rather than an outlet for expression. Artists insist that Spotify deters album sales, favors established artists and fails to support them financially. However, Spotify was created for consumers. It delivers an accessible alternative to purchasing and downloading music. The interplay between creativity and commerce is changing the nature of the music industry. Spotify has adapted to this change, providing a platform that supports both artists and consumers. Through analysis of the market, artist’s revenue, record labels and consumers, I will argue that artists should accept the evolution of the industry and support Spotify.

Companies like Apple, have decided that it is best to get in with the downloading business. However, an end to the illegal downloading conflict remains to be realized. The RIAA and associated artists continue to wage war against illegal downloaders while computer savvy audiences persist in sharing music files online every day. While it is undoubtedly true that downloading music is a crime, it remains to be proven that it is wrong. Without establishing this principle, most downloader's are likely to continue the activity. Even with new, inexpensive and available means of downloading files, they can still be shared for free online. The rift must be repaired between music lovers who feel that they have been taken advantage of in the past and recording companies and artists who worry about their future livelihood.