KEY QUESTION: Is this distribution fair given the size of the music and streaming markets? In these cases, is there too much ownership power for record companies as copyright holders? If a significant and complete restart of the music streaming industry is to take place, as the UK government recommends, a two-tier system of regulatory reform appears to be the industry, backed by legislative development that balances the intellectual property rights of music labels with mere equality for the artists who produce their works. In addition, it would limit the power of the major international record companies and thus deal with competition law issues. To address market distortions and the competitive advantage of companies hosting UGCs, it recommends introducing legally enforceable obligations regarding licensing agreements for UGCs, and the report suggests that the CMA should consider designating YouTube`s streaming services as a “strategic marketplace” in the pro-competitive framework for tech companies. As the campaign continues to receive support around the world, we are receiving a vivid example of the power of law and legal regulation to create justice and support creativity and innovation in the art world. In 2018, Spotify went under the radar for allegedly infringing thousands of songs produced by music company Wixen Music Publishing. Spotify was sued for streaming more than 20 percent of the songs in its library, which contains more than 30 million songs, without owning a license or paying royalties to the publisher. Around the same time, the streaming giant was accused by Bob Gaudio and Bluewater Music Services Corporation of failing to comply with intellectual property guidelines and circumventing the payment of mechanical licenses for music streamed on Spotify. In order to counteract adverse royalties in historic contracts, the Committee also recommends the introduction of the “right to recover works” and the “right to contractual adjustment” in the CDPA to protect artists whose royalties are disproportionate to the success of their music. Nowadays, when people want to listen to one of their favorite tracks, they simply activate one of the music streaming services like Spotify or Tidal.
These services are not only relatively cheap and easily accessible, but also offer the listener a gigantic music library that contains a huge collection of songs. As these apps have led to the transformation of the digital music market by becoming the music listening platforms, strict regulations have been put in place to avoid music piracy and copyright infringement. The music industry questions whether music streaming constitutes “making available” within the meaning of the CDPA, in which case streaming is classified as a “sale” (under the current framework), or whether streaming should be classified in the same way as a “broadcast” or “rental” where performers are entitled to a “broadcast” or “rental” whenever the Copyright on their songs is exploited, enjoy the right to appropriate remuneration. DCMS supports the latter argument and proposes that the government revise the CDPA so that the “provision” does not preclude equitable compensation. 7. Recommendation – Introduce legally enforceable obligations to standardize licensing agreements for UGC Today, as the pandemic threatens the live music industry, the way forward should include a realignment of streaming rights ownership initiatives and the introduction of a mandatory copyright certificate for all musical compositions and copyright for music in general. This article appeared in Entertainment Law & Finance, your monthly source for real-world news and strategies from key players in entertainment, contract law and intellectual property – a serious analysis of the issues and jurisprudence affecting your practice. While live streaming of music performances is not an entirely new phenomenon, the COVID crisis has changed the landscape of live performances, forcing artists around the world to reach their fan base by producing “quarantine feeds” in which they broadcast their sets live on social media platforms. Not surprisingly, many questions were raised. The government`s latest release suggests that many of the committee`s recommendations will be implemented in the coming months.
By establishing and collaborating with music industry groups and stakeholders, the Government has expressed its commitment to legislative, regulatory and practical reforms to level the playing field in the music industry and ensure fair compensation for musicians involved in the online streaming of their material. This article reviews the Committee`s recommendations and proposals (the “Report”) and the government`s responses released in September 2021. The article also deals with a bill currently before the House of Commons; “Copyright (rights and remuneration of musicians, etc.) Bill”, which seeks to amend the CDPA and addresses the issues raised in the report. Digital streaming is the primary way to access music in today`s world, as digital technology and quick access to online platforms have made creating, sharing and streaming music easier and more accessible to consumers. The UK is the largest digital music market in Europe, and online music streaming is worth more than £1 billion to the UK economy. Major record labels are now recording profit levels comparable to pre-piracy peaks, with companies like Universal Music reporting expected profits of €1.5 billion, up from €507 million a decade ago due to the rise of digital streaming. However, the DCMS report notes that more than 90% of performers earn less than 5% of their revenue from digital streaming and that professional musicians earned an average of £23,059 in 2018 (well below the national average salary this year) due to poor royalties and remuneration structures based on historical contracts responsible for high overhead. which were worn by record companies in the vinyl/CD era.
In terms of manufacturing, storage, and transportation, none of this applies to digital streaming. However, the distribution of royalties has not been updated with the growth of the music streaming industry and therefore music revenues. This has led many artists and creators to compete for a share of the increase in music revenues, raising concerns that regulatory frameworks, including copyright, have not progressed with the changes caused by increased streaming revenues. Unsurprisingly, major music labels (including Sony, Warner, and Universal Music) don`t want to share their slice of the pie, profits, or royalties. This debate has therefore led to a long-term government inquiry by the parliamentary committee of the Ministry of Digital, Culture, Media and Sports (DCMS). [1] Snapes, Laura, “MPs to examine impact of streaming on future of music industry” The Guardian (15. October 2020) www.theguardian.com/music/2020/oct/15/uk-government-to-examine-impact-of-streaming-on-future-of-music-industry. Essentially, the level of agency granted to streaming companies remains disproportionate to that of similar industries that have not undergone such significant technological changes.
These multinationals are able to exercise extraordinary power, including by setting royalties, which are then distributed to the right holder; usually a record company. Songwriters like Ed Sheeran face a future of protracted litigation because the way people consume music has changed so much over the past half-century, a leading legal expert has warned as she urges courts to reconsider their interpretation of copyright. Maybe it`s time for the UK streaming industry and the labels that dominate the industry to embrace music? The result is greater reliance and value on streaming platforms like Apple Music and Spotify, leading to their rise over several years, leaving individual artists and creators largely behind. The growing power of streaming platforms has led to calls for an industry regulator to push for profits to be shared more equitably with creators and songwriters. Curators play an important role in the context of digital streaming, which has led to collaborations between creators and curators. The committee recommends that a curator who is paid to create a playlist or who receives benefits be subject to a code of conduct developed by the Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”), similar to that which governs influencers, to ensure that their decisions are transparent and ethical.