Crappy royalties: $110 for 6 million plays

This is still a songwriter's livelihood. They should make way more than this. If I could
find independent contract work, I could charge $100 for administering one IQ test and I didn't create the test the way they created the song. To day this is fair is ridiculous.

It might not be fair, but none of the involved parties (DC, JBJ, RS) are marginalized laymen. Tons of artists sued their labels because they took the majority of digital distribution income. Plus that figure is 3+ years old. A lot has changed in these years.

I get the thing about songwriters deserving more cash. But bitchung about how unfair it is that these multi-millionaires are getting ripped off leaves a sour taste in my throat. The system worked in their favour for years, and all of a sudden, it's time for a revolution? I never heard the involved parties cry foul about payola.

I think it's time for a turning of the system because such a small percent of the people are multi-millionaires. Certainly JBJ, RS and DC cleaned up but that doesn't mean they should be payed pennies for their work even though they were paid well for decades. It's supply and demand, it's not like they didn't deserve the amount they were paid. Their songs made x dollars and they were paid for them.

It's $110 paid to one of the 3 songwriters of the song for two monhts of one streaming service that works only on 3 countries and that isn't even the most used on those countries of a song that was released 30 years ago on a payoff of 3 years ago when the numbers were smaller. And also, streaming isn't the only way to make revenues.

To me it doesn't matter when it was, $100 for 6 MILLION plays of a song. That's a really really really small amount for 6 million plays. Absolutely streaming is only one way to make revenue but that doesn't make what streaming services pay fair at all.

I think you overestimate how much is 6 million plays in a global market. It's not a lot.

• Those were 6 milion plays, as I said, in only one country (back then Pandora wasn't available on other countries).
• Pandora isn't the most used streaming service.
• Pandora is an internet radio, which means that even if you wanted to play Prayer, you couldn't. So that makes stronger my point that 6 milion plays isn't A LOT. Is good, but not 6 million buys good.
• Also, Pandora is known to have deals with copyright owners: they change earns for plays.
• That was back in 2012, streaming wasn't as popular as it is right now. Which means it's easier to get plays.
• Right now, with Spotify pays, 6 milion plays = USD 50400. If songwriters get a 10% share and we divide that on 3, he would be getting USD 1663.2, not $100.
• You are forgetting about people that play songs on Spotify that already bought the songs = extra revenues.
• You are forgetting about people that don't buy music and with Spotify are starting to. I'm not making this up, piracy got down to zero in some countries thank to Spotify and here in Argentina people used to look at you like you were crazy if you bought an album, and right now, a lot of people are paying or using legal streaming services, contributing to artists. We don't have copyright rules like in the US, and these services are making people to willingly pay for something they used to get (not rightfully, but still got it) for free.
• They should be complaining to the labels that keep a 50% share of every play, not to the services.
• And yes, I'm using the exposure card again. Maybe for Child as a songwriter isn't that important, but for the artist it is, being able to promote your music to new people = more merchandising sold = more albums sold = more gigs to play = more earnings.

Wrong. Read more carefully, please.


+1. In the music industry as in most businesses, the ones who make the biggest bucks are not the creators but the middlemen who don't do much work if any, which is unfair. Welcome to the jungle!

It's necessary for "big names" such as DC and Taylor Swift -i.e. artists who became millionaires thanks to their work and don't really need the money anymore but who are listened to- to stand up and make a stand to try and defend lesser known songwriters whose only source of income is the songs they write (not all songwriters are performers as well).

TV, radio stations and stores pay copyrights to play songs, it shoudn't be any different for internet sites that do more or less the same.


http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...ent-copyrights

http://www.techhive.com/article/2881...ky-to-poc.html

And of course, rules are different from one country to another, which get things even more complicated.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/med...andora-spotify

"Child notes that he and co-authors Jon Bon Jovi and Richie Sambora recently got a check for $110 for six million plays of the Bon Jovi hit Livin On a Prayer on Pandora".

Yes, it doesn't say each, but on the image that has been posted here clearly shows only Shanks' name and plays on Pandora. I stand my point.

I stand my point too:
The pic I posted is obviously NOT an official paper (read: contract) used by the Pandora company owners to retribute the songwriters whose songs they play. Stop being stupid and behaving like a 12 year-old, in the same post with the image you based your false allegation on, Child explained the matter in several interviews, it's crystal clear -or don't you understand the verb "share"?

Worst case: He got $110. Best case: $330. Neither amount sounds like a fair amount for 6 million plays regardless of what year it was.