Spotify sued by musician for $150 million in royalties

CNN Money ^ | December 29,2015 | Jackie Wattles

[American Faith Today]

A lawsuit filed in federal court against the music streaming service Spotify is seeking at least $150 million in royalties for musicians and copyright owners. The suit, filed Monday by guitarist and vocalist David Lowery of alternative rock band Cracker, alleges Spotify "knowingly, willingly, and unlawfully reproduces and distributes copyrighted" music without a license to do so, Lowery's law firm Michelman & Robinson said. Violating federal copyright law could mean fines of between $750 and $150,000 for each infringement. That could mean big payouts if the court sides with Lowery, who filed the case on behalf of himself and "all similarly situated artists." The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court of Central California, claims the distributing rightsholders of some songs on Spotify have not been compensated by the company. Spotify said in a statement on Tuesday that it plans to pay "every penny" it owes to songwriters and publishers, but "unfortunately, especially in the United States, the data necessary to confirm the appropriate rightsholders is often missing, wrong, or incomplete."

[American Faith Today]

I can see both sides of this. Artists should be compensated and by all means copyright and intellectual property rights should be upheld. But the complaining about decreased album sales and so forth- it's just the way the industry itself is going. I'm probably in the minority almost as far as someone going out and still occasionally buying a cd or something. Heck, you can listen to entire albums on YouTube in a lot of cases.

[plain talk]

I’m a musician who supported myself with a regular job and played on the side. This allowed me the lifestyle I preferred and ability to play whatever I wanted without having to worry about selling out to make ends meet. This is a decision I made in the 1970s.

For most musicians there is little money to be made in this industry and it is getting worse. While I sort of feel sorry for them they made their choice and I made mine. Money for nothing and the chicks for free, right?

[DaveyB]

I never heard of the alternative rock band Cracker. I'm guessing that 150 million is approximately a million dollars every time a song of theirs was played.

I thought ASCAP and BMI paid the royalties, but what do I know, I never even heard of the alternative rock band Cracker.

[Bobalu]

Someday everyone will admit that the old copyright rules simply cannot work in the digital age.

New strategies must be employed to make a living from music and most other art forms.

There is no going back, adapt or perish.

[American Faith Today]

I hadn’t heard of them either.

At first I thought maybe the guy who used to hang around with Kid Rock had lost his uncle. =P

[Graybeard58]

I just read that a woman is suing the t.v. show, “Big Bang Theory” based on her recent discovery that her mother evidently copy righted in 1937 “Soft Kitty, Warm Kitty etc. that the Big Bang Theory has used several times.

1937! Where does it end?

[ifinnegan]

Ever hear of Camper van Beethoven?

That was Lowrey’s band prior to Cracker.

[PCPOET7]

I think copyright of music should only last 10 or 20 years after the death of the song writer and performer the same for books and art. I also think that copyrights should always reside with there creator and not be transferable.

[ifinnegan]

When you own something, when do you want to let anyone use it for free without permission?

[ifinnegan]

“I think copyright of music should only last 10 or 20 years after the death of the song writer and performer the same for books and art. I also think that copyrights should always reside with there creator and not be transferable.”

Why?

Do you think the house your father built should only belong to you after he dies for 20 years?

Then anyone can go live in it.

[PCPOET7]

copy rights were meant to compensate artists....an idea cant be owned forever.....no it is not the same as inheriting a house......my suggestion is go be creative yourself not to rely on an the accident of your birth allowing you to sit back and do nothing with your life..

[ifinnegan]

“my suggestion is go be creative yourself not to rely on an the accident of your birth allowing you to sit back and do nothing with your life..”

You can say that about any inheritance.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

Me too. Same situation. And very little moolah for studio work,

[Wolfie]

Even Spotify admits the money is owed. They just say that in some cases they dont have a contract in place because they don’t know who to pay, but use the material anyway.

[smalltownslick]

“I thought ASCAP and BMI paid the royalties,”

They do (as well as SESAC, who are brutal)- they pay the songwriters only. When the Digital Copyright Act came to be, they pay ARTISTS, MUSICIANS, PRODUCERS AND LABELS. That’s through Sound Exchange. This is good for artists, but dreadful for internet radio. This does NOT apply to terrestrial radio and never has.

Spotify and some of those other services shouldn’t be too affected by it, as they make money from their services. But it’s the hobbyists who are hurt, those who have internet stations featuring music no terrestrial station would ever play, giving exposure to lots of niche artists, who have been slapped with fees based on the number of listeners a station has (since they can’t base it on profits like regular radio). It seemed from the beginning like an effort to cripple internet radio, and it’s having that effect. Live365 has just cut way back, and my guess is they will probably hang it up.

At the very least, they should apply this to terrestrial radio, and just for fun, retroactively. See how quickly support dies.

[PCPOET7]

yes you can.

The wealthy that I have the most respect for are the ones that educate there kids and inform them that there inheritance is going to be limited in nature because they plan on donating to causes like hospitals, museums, libraries and other groups.