JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Industry Message Forum Another punch in the nose...

… though it didn't bleed much. The days of royalty free music is getting closer.

From Getty Images:

“We are notifying you that we are retiring the Getty Images Music Portal platform in early June. To meet the needs of our customers, we will be collaborating with Epidemic Sound to incorporate their royalty free music collection into our products.

As a result, your Getty Images Music Contributor Agreement and/or Pump Audio License agreement is terminated effective August 6, 2020.

Prior to the termination of your agreement, all music tracks will be removed from GettyImages.com/Music. However, customers will still be able to complete licenses until August 6, 2020.”


John

Epidemic Sound - perfect name for them. It's an epidemic that's destroying the value of music. And the musicians are the main problem, giving their music away for peanuts.

John

Well I think it's been a foregone conclusion that music is now free for probably a decade. May have taken this a bit longer to submit.

Music is still very much alive, the music business is dead. Then again, music was never meant to be a business.

I can honestly say, I would have had an amazing time as a kid having access to all this free music, from any genre, any year, time period, era, instead I only got to hear a surface amount of music.

That's partly why Beatles, Stones, Led Zeppelin, are so iconically huge, they didn't have all that behind the scenes music to compete with. It was them and whoever else managed to make it in radio. And radio only played top tracks on albums

If given a choice, most people of any age would never want to go back to that.

It creates opportunity for anyone who plays musuc, just, don't expect money for it. So it's a tradeoff, exposure for money. Hopefully the exposure leads to money

Not much of a trade-off FD. Work hard, create a product, and then it's free for everyone. Oh, except a handful of greedy basturds, that control the music, making a fortune from the product. Can you imagine going into a grocery store and find out every thing's for free. How long do you think the real music creators and real musicians will keep creating? So you want music for free? In a couple years it will be all crap music.

John

Once all the details of the "Music Modernization Act" are discovered/revealed to us "commoners"... we will probably be forced to abandon our pursuit of actually making money from our creativity. I get a little more disturbed about it the more I delve into the nooks and crannies hidden in that legislation. I'm sure they meant well... but you know the old saying about "The Road to Hell being paved with good intentions!"

In all that reading, I kept wondering about what was so special about the year 1972... after which the terms of this Act began to apply?

John, as a music maker id like music to not be free....But then that would probably eliminate all the avenues we now have. Even music on this site is free, in youtube, spotify, soundcloud, reverbnation, it's all free. Without it, I probably couldn't get anybody to listen to me.

But I also remember being young and having a paper route, and only able to buy my favorite bands latest albums. I couldn't even buy GREAT classic albums, I had to be really slective. And my dad would complain for buying ANY music...so you really need that? Well yeah dad, we only got three channels on tv and no internet lol

Free music exposes the world to music they would never be able to hear or even knew existed, and helps artists get heard when people don't have to pay for it

But whether I want it or not It's here, try to look for the positives

If we took a world wide vote to do away with music altogether, I bet there would not be 2% that would vote yes to that. The economy would suffer a silent demise like you wouldn't believe. Half to three quarters of radio stations would go off the air, music is what draws listeners to hear the ads, the real reason radio exist. Without ads much merchandise would never be sold. Many ads on TV use music to draw attention to the items they are selling. Churches would draw a lot less people without music and would get a lot less saved that are convicted through music. Music is a gift from God, He equips people to play music (some better that others) and sing, why should that gift not receive rewards from that gift. People with other gifts like Doctors, lawyers, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, nurses, etc, etc. get paid when they use their gifts. But people with gifts in the arts are expected to give their gifts for free to other people that make money off their gifts. I use gifts and talents interchangeably here, because they are much the same thing.

When people want to raise money for charity, who do they call on, carpenters, plumbers, no, they call musicians and singers to perform for free. They know people will come and donate because they are drawn by the music. I don't consider myself to be musician of any great talent, but I use my meager talent to write songs, if someone records those songs and uses those songs to make money, should I not also make money. If a movie or TV show uses my music to sell admission tickets or ads, why should the creator of that music not be compensated. Sure, there are people that give away their music so they can boast of having a song played on an ad, boasting may puff up ones ego but puts no meat on your bones.

Don't sell music short. It is important to society. I've read that cows give more milk when they have music to listen to. They have their preference in music styles too. I saw somewhere where a man who had not spoken for years because of dementia, who started singing along with songs that he knew in his youth. Music has a healing quality that even Doctors can't explain, just like they can't explain how prayer helps people heal.

In crawling through the archives a small clipping fell out. August 7, 2003.
Music business feeling pinch.
Jupiter Research said it has revised downward its forecast of music sales online.
"The industry is suffering from competition for entertainment dollars, changing demographics, the end of the CD upgrade cycle and piracy," Lee Black, senior analyst, said at Jupiter's Plug-In Conference and Expo ( www.jupiterevents/com/plugin/summer03/agenda2.html ).
Jupiter now says online CD sales this year will grow little from last year's level of about $750 million. Black expects that in the next five years, online music sales will grow to $3.3 billion and account for about a quarter of U. S. music spending.

That was 17 years ago, on the edge of the slippery slope.
It doesn't seem it would be 'legal' for someone to come into the farmer's market and start selling the farmer's produce, product of his labor, the 'investing' of his time, time, the stuff of which life is made, making a profit and cutting the farmer out of the deal.

The key word is 'legal'. Many things have gotten 'legalized' by Leadership Decision-Makers in government, in collusion with Leadership Decision-Makers in commerce. It is a trend of perversion of regular Capitalism to Predatory Capitalism, most obvious when governments 'legalize' the bribe, taking a 'cut of the loot' in exchange for 'legalizing' Predatory Gambling, with state lotteries, state casinos, Payday Lenders, the repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, which made the banking practices that collapsed the global economy in 1929 illegal.

Repeal made those practices 'legal' again. Bankers, Professional Lenders, in very profitable business a hundred years, became banksters, writing mortgage documents and getting Amateur Borrowers to sign them, 'legally' binding them to the Variable Rate 'balloon' option the Professional Lender wrote in.
No document the Amateur Borrower submitted, on demand of the Professional Lender to PROVE they could afford to pay the loan back would give a rational banker the idea they could continue pay the mortgage if the Pro-Lender exercised that 'balloon' clause option.
That's exactly what the Pro's did. And collapsed the global economy in 2008.
Some 12 million pieces of real estate fell into the hands of the bankers. The original owners didn't recover the real estate. They got paid and walked away. The bank loaned money to the new buyer, and, if the bank was also the seller, owner of the property, got their money back immediately. Then they foreclosed, and had the money and the real estate.
Since it was all perfectly 'legal', no one went to jail.

'Legalization', manipulating Legislation, is enabling the Predatory Capitalists who take the Intellectual Property of music creators, sell it, and cut the creators out of the deal. Things are usually illegal for a reason. For that reason they should stay illegal.

Everette, I agree but all those things you described are non monetary, they actually support free music more than paid music

Should people have to pay for healing powers of music, that seems a bit like paying for holy water...never understood that.

If it's a gift from God who has the right to charge for it.

Id say though if given enough time people could happily live without music, it's starting to happen. Music was way more important before people had other things to do...And I say that regretfully.

You can hear the quality of music has changed because people dont need great music anymore, they just need something to do while they go online or their phones.

"
Id say though if given enough time people could happily live without music, it's starting to happen. Music was way more important before people had other things to do...And I say that regretfully" - FD

Without music? That's crazy FD. Did you ever watch a movie with the music muted? Very, very dull. People would stop watching movies too. Music adds the emotional impact to movies. I think without music, life would become cold & dull. A world filled with people without emotion...

John

Well as part of a movie maybe, transitional effects, yeah, but when was the last time somebody sat down to listen to an album , without doing anything else? I used to do that all the time, it seems now I did it cause it was a great way pass time.

And another question is do you like every bit of music you hear in movies or tv, do you like every song? If not, how does that help.

There's no doubt though that the purpose of music has changed.

Still important to me but I make it.

I've told this story before, but I'll tell it again for some who have not heard this. The music insiders have been aware of this for over two decades. They new what was coming and adjusted.

In 1998, I attended a high level panel discussion on the future of the music industry. It was attended by nearly every hitter writer, producer and publisher in Nashville, and on the DIAS were representatives of ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, hit label people, producers, publishers, and hit writers. Also were two guys from the "tech industry" to tell us of technical changes that were coming to the business due to this new thing which was being called "THE INTERWEB." Everyone talked of the new adventures, how we would be able to get music anywhere, artists could go global, etc.
But it would also bring millions of people and billions of songs into the pipeline. Music would be everywhere, free, and endless. The consumer would get whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted and not have to pay a dime for it.

I was sitting next to one of the biggest writers in Nashville with one of the biggest current hits at that time. He raised his hands and asked "HOW WILL A SONGWRITER MAKE A LIVING?"
The answer from one of the tech guys was very matter of fact. "You WON'T."
He explained that while writers and artists could be everywhere, the music would be free. There would be no more royalties.

It was a lot of bad words and fights that went on. I left the meeting pretty depressed.

Not long after that, you saw everything change. The hit writers, publishers, became the record labels. They found their own artists, produced them in house, promoted more of the artists than songs. They shifted to getting their money from merchandising, touring, product endorsements.It was all inside, just like rap and hip hop had done.

The value of songs dropped, the amount of people doing it exploded and things like "publishiung deals" were a thing of the past. Music became something in the background of people's lives. Not the foreground.
Did the quality decline? Of course. But did it matter?Nope. When people have lower expectations and even relatable to hit and long lasting songs of the past, it doesn't matter.

Artists can make tens of millions of dollars on touring and product lines (of course that is going to be in question for a while, due to the current Pandemic) andwth the advent of reality shows like AMERICAN IDOL AND THE VOICE with their "360 DEGREE DEALS" (where the label, production companies, etc producers) would share in the revenue from advertisting and other elements of the merchandising end.

Everette, everyone makes those "We should all go on strike" comments, think of it like this. There are ONE BILLION SONGS A MONTH that go onto the Internet. A hundred thousand videos an hour uploaded. Where exactly would this strike come from? Who would particpate? People not put their music up? Not even close to happening, ever. There would never be an end to the amount of music that is already created. And if adversting agencies needed music to pay for, they licence the hits of the past. Why do you think they are in every commercial that exists?

The heads and main filmakers, advertising agencies, television networks, motion picture companies ARE COMPOSERS, SONGWRITERS AND PRODUCERS. They simply write more stuff of their own to use in THEIR productions and creations. They are paid because they control the output. Not a few amateurs or wanna be's, or even former hit writers. There is a reason many of hit writers all turned to teaching, workshops, online courses. Because money dried up in the value of songs. Been seeing hundreds of mega stars, turning to the Internet to teach "Master classes" in music, acting, directing, producing, etc?

Wonder why that is? Cause that's where the money is. Like selling "picks and shovels" to the prospectors in the Gold Rushes of the 1800's.

Look, it sucks. But it is what it is. Go back through history. What has been the hardest thing in music? GETTING PAID. Go back and look at the lives of Chuck Berry or today's casulty, LITTLE RICHARD. They had trouble dealing with record companies, managers, etc. There were always people taking their money. Now it's the Internet platforms, SPOTIFY, GOOGLE, PANDORA, ECHO DOT.

There will be people who make money. Most of entertainment will all be free. Some will find niches. Some will expand those niches, have loyal fan bases, and do well with their own avenues.

But expecting just the "average joe" to write a song, get it cut, get a bunch of mailbox money?
Don't look for it.

MAB

Humm,
Copyright started with The Statues of Ann, (Look it up) so writers could reap some of the rewards of their creations. Copyright Preceded the U.S. Constitution and has been modified, Improved over the years. I understand Big Bands mostly who wrote their own arrangements did not share them with other bands. As noted here from time to time, there are Scam Artists and Thieves just looking to rip you off if they get the chance. And if someone plagerizes your music, it will be up to you to go after them in Court. And if it hasn't been Registered with the Library of Congress you may be just SOL.

Because my used to be Publisher didn't do all the things to protect his music he has some out there that he got nothing for.

Marc, you need to write books, you basicly wrote a book here. I've seen worse articles in paid magazines and books. Maybe start a blog or Facebook group.

Here's a question for all here, and anyone else...

If we could turn back time...no Cher pun.... But if we could, would you trade the way music is free now, for the way it used to be?. but your music couldn't be heard since free music sites wouldn't exist.?

I sometimes wish we could go back pre internet, but that's just general and not music.

Remember, making money in music was never a reality for almost everyone, so u'd be trading the ability to post your songs online for free and be heard, or sing them in the shower after trying to sell your music.

Hope I didn't influence your answer....lol

yes FD God give different gifts and talents to different people in different degrees, but He does not expect other people to exploit and steal those gifts from other people to make themselves rich while not paying something to the creator of that item. The bible says do not muzzle the ox while harvesting the crop. The animal deserves to eat while working. You starve the worker and you will have no worker to provide the crop that you need to sell. I don't know what your talent is that you use to make a living, but you expect to be paid for that talent. You may just be a labourer but that labour is a needed talent for that boss to make money, so he/she is expected to pay you a portion of that money so you too can live. An architect designs a building, he expects to be paid for his talent though he will not build that building, but that building would not be built without a plan to go by. I rest my case.

Well Everette, The Bible also says it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than it is a rich man to get into the kingdom of Heaven.

He also said, sell everything you own and come and follow me. So, anyone who is making any kind of a living is not doing that.

Even still, if music is a gift from God, that means it's right there with air, water,

They do sell water, sometimes at UnGodly prices!

I agree everybody has gifts they need to use. I'm just not sure God intended talents to be a way to make money. At one time in civilization, people didn't make a living at all, they just looked for food, women stayed in the cave raising kids.

It's easy to get modern, and think from point of view of the here and now, but life used to be way different, even before Jesus came along

Sorry to write books, but these subjects get fairly involved. It is not just one "I wrote a song and it's being played and where is my money?" There are a lot of reasons that all tie in together. Changes in the business models. Changes in how we are paid and how we are not. Changes in how the public gets, appreciates (or doesn't appreciate) music. And how we all deal with it from here on out.

My comments for years have all been talking to this. I have continually beat the drum to realighn attitudes and expectations of making money or doing much at all in music in the ways people seem to always believe. And the Internet creates quite a few myths about all things, especially creative endeavors. One is about how easy it is to make money and how we all should be this or that.... No. We have to EARN everything we get and we have to do it on the world stage.

I have continually said that if you are trying to do something in the actual music business, you have to:

Create your own niche.
Find your own artists.
Be cautious of what you spend.
Inject reality into dreams.
Be grateful for anything you recieve.
DON'T DEPEND ON ANYONE ELSE FOR ANYTHING.

I've done my best to describe the "behind the curtian" stuff and answer some "WHY'S" about all this. Sorry if it goes on. I like to be thorough. I get passionate about this subject because I have seen SO MANY PEOPLE spend thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars, raid their 401 K retirenment funds, fund their children to wasted college degrees, support things blindely that are destined to fail. Seen the break up of families, divorces, and a LOT of drug addiction, alcoholism, domestic abuse, and suicides, due to addiction to musical dreams. So I take it pretty seriously.

Everett, why is it you always go to the "SOMEONE STEALING FROM OTHERS?" that is not so much what is happening. Some, I agree does happen. But no one gets into any of this naively, or if they do, they need to see a therapist. This is all voluntary No one is forced to do music, to try for success, to put their music OUT THERE. No one is forced to do that. If they get into bad deals, get ripped off, get into schemes and scams, IT'S THEIR OWN FAULT. There is no shortage of [eople trying to wave red flags, and slow people down or head problems off at that past. Most people who try to do music are so self focused and so undeterred, they look at nothing but what they are doing AT THAT MOMENT.

So no one is forcing anyone to do anything. It's not THEFT, when you do what you tell people you are going to do and they sign bad deals because they are not paying attention. Sorry. That is not theft. That's IGNORANCE.

MAB

No Marc, but why waste it on us, start a blog or fb group, and I mean that sincerely. Some good insights you have

Can't agree with you on that Marc. If someone uses something you created, or own, without permission or compensation to make themselves money, it is stealing. Even if they don't use it to make themselves money, it is stealing. Some people like to "borrow" things, like my car to go for a joyride, it is stealing, I may get my car back, they didn't make any money from it, but they stole it. Sometimes politicians will use some song to promote themselves in their campaign, if they didn't get permission to use it, they are forced to stop, even though it is out there in public domain and they are not making money from it, but it is a wrongful use of said song. Intellectual property is protected by copyright for a reason, so people can not wrongfully use it.

If I write a song and put it out there for my own pleasure or for others to listen to, not even to make money, it does not give permission for someone to use it in an ad to sell something. I'd be flattered if someone sung it in church or at some free concert, but if they record that song to make money, they should pay a royalty.

Fdemento,

Thank you but I am on a half dozen other sites, including my Facebook stuff, in 30 minutes I do my twice weekly Facebook Live shows, that I do talk about all this stuff, demonstrate what I am talking about and explain much of what we talk here. There are a lot of sites I am involved with. So I do what you suggest, thanks for the suggestions. I already do that.

Everett, I do and don't agree with you. Yes technically it is theft, when someone uses your creative property without compensation. But that horse is long out of the barn. The only people that can do anything about that are people wtih deep pockets and huge legal teams.

But the reality once again, NO ONE IS FORCED TO PUT THEIR MUSIC UP ON ANY SITES. They can put them on their own YOU TUBE or web sites and control how people get their music. Many do, which are what paid subscriptions are about. Some will do snippets, verse and chorus of songs, and you have to pay for the entire song. That is all in DEMAND. And writers and artists can KEEP EVERYTHING TO THEMSELVES. Period. No one forces them to put music out there.

But... if you use pretty much any social networking site or any place where music is used, you can play by the rules of the platform, or not play.

Shoplifting is ilegal but it still happens all day every day. Totally wrong, but pretty much unenforceable. And now there are plenty of people out there, that believe it is WRONG to enforce laws at all.

In a perfect world we would all be compensated for what we do. But it is not a perfect world. You have to create your own demand and how you deal with it is up to you and your customers. Wish it was different, but it's not.

MAB

Just to throw a spanner into this conversation....

For pictures "Royalty Free" does NOT mean free. You pay a fee then you are allowed to use it on your web site. But you do not pay for every visit and every view. As someone who operates several web sites I am intimately familiar with the concept. I actually use totally free images that have been granted Creative Commons licenses or where photographers have given voluntarily given up their copyright...look at say Pixabay vs Getty Images to see what I mean

I just googled it and the same terms apply to "Royalty Free Music". You pay a one time license fee, then you can use it in say your Youtube video without having to pay more each time it is played.

In both cases the one time license fee costs more ...so for music, while the Spotify streaming rate is insignificant per play....the one time license fee is many many times that. AND the artist gets a cut

Just google "Royalty Free Music" and see for yourself