Affordable And Reliable Home Recording Equipment

See Meredith Corp., 1 F. Supp. 3d at 188. Individuals and entities are still free, however, to obtain “direct licenses” straight from the copyright holder and/or “source licenses” sold directly from the song 's producer. Id. at 190.

In the past decade, the role of the music publisher has shifted due to the popularization of digital music and streaming services. Digital music and streaming services necessitate various kinds of licenses, rather than the simpler nature of radio licensing.

The first problem is the royalty fees made with labels. An artist’s album can cost anything from $15,000 to $200,000 (Recording Connection) and the artist is often left in debt after which is slowly paid back through the sales of their own records which only leaves them a fraction of what the original product was sold for. Another major problem with most major record labels is that their sole reason to get artists is to further their own profit. Most major labels put business before art,

Over the past fifty years, the British Music Publishing industry has undergone dramatic changes. It has evolved as an entity with innovations in technology, changes and creations of laws and new mediums to promote and exploit songs to a wider audience. Therefore, the way in which the music publishing industry operates and exploits its assets has completely transformed, and continues to do so at a rapid pace. This paper will attempt to explore the ways in which publishers exploit song copyrights and the way in which this has changed over the past 60 years. It is important to define what is meant by copyright and its role within the industry. The Performing Right Society website states: “Copyright

Music Copyright is a very important aspect of the music industry. The Copyright law was established to preserve the creativity and rights of authors, composers, performers of expression. Copyright is the law that protects the property rights of the creator of an original work in a fixed tangible medium. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copyright) A fixed tangible medium is something substantial like copying lyrics on paper or putting a song on tape or CD. Copyright can be seen every where in the music industry. Many music artist of our culture today have been involved in copyright issues. Recently, on MTV news it was stated that, "As the music industry becomes increasingly concerned about protecting the

‘Independent record labels have been around since music started being recorded’ (King, 2012, p.13). Created by fanatics with a passion for music, the recording and production process was often self-funded and the purpose was to nurture talent and creativity. Most of the major record companies we know today would have once started in this manner (King, 2012).

The popular music industry in the late 1990s was dominated by a small number of integrated corporations with headquarters in Europe, the United States and Japan. This music market starts simply with an artist and moves along through many steps to the consumer. Everything has its start when a musician presents his music to a music manager, and if he/she finds the music promising, a contract is signed between the two, recordings are made and a marketing plan is drafted for the

Once you have a record, it's yours. You can sell it to anyone you like, for any price they are willing to pay. You can buy more records for your collection just as easily, from anyone willing to sell. CDs don't keep any value, they don't save very well. A digital download is never truly your property to do with as you

The major music-only stores such as Tower Records (which once wielded considerable influence in the industry) went bankrupt, replaced by box stores (such as Wal-Mart and Best Buy). Recording artists began to rely primarily on live performances and merchandise for their income, which in turn made them more dependent on music promoters such as Live Nation (which dominates tour promotion and owns a large number of music venues.)[6] In order to benefit from all of an artist 's income streams, record companies began to rely on the "360 deal", a new business relationship pioneered by Robbie Williams and EMI in 2007.[7] At the other extreme, record companies also used simple manufacturing and distribution deals, which gives a higher percentage to the artist, but does not cover the expense of marketing and promotion. Many newer artists no longer see any kind of "record deal" as an integral part of their business plan at all. Inexpensive recording hardware and software made it possible to create high quality music in a bedroom and distribute it over the internet to a worldwide audience.[8] This, in turn, caused problems for recording studios, record producers and audio engineers: the Los Angeles Times reported that, by 2009, as many as half of the recording facilities in that city had failed.[9] Consumers benefited enormously from the ease with which music can be shared from computer to computer, whether over the internet or by the exchange of

The music industry is an oligopoly. Since the late 1800’s people like Thomas Edison have been buying up patents in communication technology, forming monopolies, leading to a non-competitive entertainment industry. With only a handful of corporations controlling all aspects of acquisition, distribution and marketing of music, harsh business principles create an exploitative industry that takes the best of what artists have to offer and leaves many of them unable to support themselves. Beginning in the 1950’s with payola and white cover music and ultimately evolving into iTunes and Spotify, the music industry has grown into a billion dollar industry with far-reaching influence and control. Contracts rarely serve the artists’ best interest and many are left out to dry when their usefulness has expired.

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.

• Artists Get The Rights To Their Music: This is a massive benefit of signing a contract with an indie label. As they have there own rights their have been a big increase of artists music being in the charts or being used in tv, film, and movies. By being allowed to keep the rights to the music, artists have the option to do what they would like once the song has been recorded.

Music licensing is certainly not the ideal solution to maintain the integrity of the art. Music licensing has created situation in which people actually have to pay to use folk songs such as "Happy Birthday" in certain circumstances. The company that owns the license to the song actually receives millions of dollars every year for a song that nobody knows who originally wrote. However, compensating artists for their works is a complicated endeavor and does not receive much public funding in a capitalist system. Therefore, even though the licensing practice may be counter-productive the art form and overly commercialized, it is a necessary evil that must be tolerated in modern society.

The world market of record music in 1990s was dominated by only five big corporations: BMG Entertainment, EMI, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group. The majors could maintain their status thanks to patents and agreements, technological improvements and M&As. The majors had the complete control of patents and music rights from the artists. Even though the artists tried to directly contact to the customers, they could not afford the attempt. Thus, they relied on the professional signers and on the publishing company. The

The lower cost of digital music and the increasing popularity of streaming services mean that record labels may have to resign themselves to a future in which the inflated pre-digital revenue streams they are trying to regain are firmly a thing of the past.