Posted on 06/20/2015 10:34:32 PM PDT by a fool in paradise
"There definitely seems to be a coalescing of opinions to opt out," one indie label executive tells Rolling Stone
Days after Apple executives announced their splashy new music-streaming service last week before a roaring crowd of developers in San Francisco, they presented 250-page licensing contracts to skeptical independent record labels. Indie sources say the tech giant does not intend to pay them royalties for Apple Music's free, heavily marketed, three-month trial period — and many are refusing to sign. "I hesitate to say 'everyone,' but a lot of independent labels are of the same mind — that it's kind of a raw deal," a source at a top indie label tells Rolling Stone. "There definitely seems to be a coalescing of opinions to opt out."
Several sources have told Rolling Stone that Apple execs have refused to negotiate on this key point as they prepare to launch the service June 30th. "For the biggest [music] retailer in the country, iTunes has been a pretty good partner to indie labels," says another label source. "The biggest bummer is that [this] just throws that goodwill out the door." Digital Music News first reported that some major labels will be opting out of Apple's service until they are happier with the company's terms.
Reps for the American Association for Independent Music, which represents most of the top indies, declined to comment, but last week, the association posted a highly skeptical comment about Apple's proposed contract: "Since a sizable percentage of Apple's most voracious music consumers are likely to initiate their free trials at launch, we are struggling to understand why rights holders would authorize their content on the service before October 1st," the association wrote. "Please do not feel rushed to sign Apple’s current offer."
After announcing Apple Music, which includes Spotify-style streaming for $10 per month (after the free trial period), a radio station with experienced DJs and other services alongside the iTunes store, Apple music exec Eddy Cue told Rolling Stone the company had signed licensing deals with all three major record labels and "a few" of the top indies.
"Now that we're live and we're going around talking about it, we'll go after everybody around the world," he told Rolling Stone. "This is something we've done many times. Even in the original iTunes Music Store, we never did a deal with the indies — we actually launched with the [major] labels... We’ve got the next three weeks to complete this and get those done."
Apple declined to comment further for this story.
Some executives at influential indies say they're not worried, though. "Hopefully, this will come in and change everything. Hopefully, they'll throw us a bone or something for doing it," says Matthew Johnson, founder of Fat Possum, the Oxford, Mississippi, label that puts out music by Smith Westerns, Spiritualized and others. "Somebody's got to figure out the streaming model and Apple's got a really great shot at it."
But others predict Apple Music will launch with key missing artists, at least until the service first begins charging users after the trial period in the fall. "People would have been open for, certainly, a 30-day trial — it's very common industry standard — and pretty reduced rates for the other two months," says one of the indie-label sources. "I just think the way they're going about it — three months [of] not getting paid anything — is kind of ridiculous."
I wonder if they will have any Van Morrison songs
The Big Royalty Check
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib_jbtGA9-M
Let’s cut off our noses to spite our faces.
Apple has cut off its own nose before.
They had Steve Jobs to come up with a way to get them back in the black. Now they don’t.
I buy a lot of music. Mostly Indies.
I do not understand why this would hurt the independent labels.
Apple is starting something new. No one has ever been previously paid one cent from Apple Music because it has not existed until now.
I am thinking that if the service is successful, it will be a new source of revenue for these guys. If it is not, there is no harm.
If anyone can explain just what it costs any of these labels to have their music played I would love to hear it. I mean real honest, out of pocket costs, not “lost royalties”, which I don’t really see as a cost, since it is a new service.
I do know for sure that there will be an endless supply of new aspiring musicians and groups for as long as humanity exists. Many, many more than there are minutes in the day to listen to them. It just seems to me that giving away samples is the requirement for getting into this new music marketplace.
the industry standard in freemium streaming services seems to be 1 month free and Apple is planning 3 months.
And according to Billboard as of June 16th, independent labels hadn’t even been sent the contract.
Independents are the lifeblood (of talent, not revenue) of the music industry. Sun and SubPop were indies too. Without Elvis or Nirvana, music would’ve remained in “pop” slumps.
1. So exactly what revenue do they lose from the two extra months? I just don't see a loss.
2. Of course the counter argument is that Apple is not planning an "industry standard" service. If the independent labels don't want to play, that is their choice. My opinion is that the Apple service is going to dominate the industry, and if labels don't get on board now, it will hurt them in the future.
And according to Billboard as of June 16th, independent labels hadn’t even been sent the contract.
The largest company in the world is negotiating with the largest record labels and entertainment companies. These are make it or break it negotiations. They are not going to change anything for small mom and pop organizations. This is the way the world of big business works.
If the independents don't like this, they are free to find another way to distribute their product.
Independents are the lifeblood (of talent, not revenue) of the music industry...
I am not convinced that the stars of the music industry are the ones with the most talent, or even the only possible stars. Barriers to entry are very low, and there are lots & lots of wanna-bes. Probably more a matter of luck than anything else. There will always be a steady stream of new players trying to make it.
I actually meant the musicians were cutting off their noses tom spite their faces.
Being among the played in the first three months, even without royalties for that period will be a boon to a lesser known group more so than the three months of royalties they would get.
You are right about Apple’s history, though. W/o Jobs they will continue on momentum.
Yes, you get it.
Dumb on their part.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.