Need another reason to hate the RIAA?

[Mr. Dictator]

Source

By PETER LAURIA

February 27, 2008 -- Artist managers are girding for battle with their music overlords over when their clients are going to see some of the dough negotiated last year in copyright-infringement settlements with a host of Web sites.

Universal Music, Warner Music and EMI - either collectively or individually - settled claims with Napster, Kazaa and Bolt.com. Napster alone had to cough up $270 million.

The fourth major label, SonyBMG, was not part of the suit because Napster was owned by BMG parent company Bertelsmann.

All four struck separate deals with YouTube that included revenue participation.

A contingent of prominent artist managers claims that little to none of that money has trickled down to their clients. They are now considering legal action.

"Artist managers and lawyers have been wondering for months when their artists will see money from the copyright settlements and how it will be accounted for," said lawyer John Branca, who has represented Korn, Don Henley, and The Rolling Stones, among others.

"Some of them are even talking about filing lawsuits if they don't get paid soon."

Record label sources said corporate bosses are still deciding on how best to split the money. In determining the payout, they said not every artist is owed money and it must be calculated with regard to the level of copyright infringement for each artist.

What's more, these sources said that after the labels recouped their legal expenses, there wasn't much left to pass along to the artists.

But a source on the artists' side said that is an argument heard all too often in the music business.

Getting money out of the major labels is never easy, but given the industry's downward financial spiral it is exponentially more difficult now, the source said.

"The record labels are experts at transferring money around and putting the onus on artists managers to find it."

Irving Azoff, the legendary talent manager for The Eagles and Jewel, among others, echoed that sentiment.

"They will play hide and seek, but eventually will be forced to pay something," Azoff said. "The record companies have even tried to credit unrecouped accounts. It's never easy for an artist to get paid their fair share."

Reps for the three labels dispute the notion that they are withholding settlement money.

A spokeswoman for EMI said the label has started the process of "sharing proceeds from the Napster and Kazaa settlements with artists and writers whose work was infringed upon."

Warner Music's representative said the label "is sharing the Napster settlement with its recording artists and songwriters and at this stage nearly all settlement monies have been disbursed."

A Universal Music spokesman said the label's policy "is to share its portion of various settlements with its artists, regardless of whether their contracts require it."


peter.lauria@nypost.com

thoughts?

 

[skadistic]

So the RIAA did this to line their (the labels) pockets and not really for the artists!

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Of course the artists aren't getting the money. The RIAA represents the distribution firms, not the artists.

Cleo

 

[Mr. Dictator]

So the RIAA did this to line their (the labels) pockets and not really for the artists!

but...but...they stand for the artists!

that's who they've said they've been defending this whole time.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

I wonder how damaging to public opinion it would be for the RIAA itself to be the defendant in a suit initiated by the artists? I think any goodwill the RIAA has is because people feel that artists are being robbed by piracy. Once it's clear that the RIAA's interest is adverse to that of the artists, it could change. Of course, since most news outlets are owned by members of the RIAA, I don't know how much play it would get.

Cleo

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

THis is why I don't find downloading music immoral. The money doesn't go to the artist it goes to the record company.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

I wonder how damaging to public opinion it would be for the RIAA itself to be the defendant in a suit initiated by the artists? I think any goodwill the RIAA has is because people feel that artists are being robbed by piracy. Once it's clear that the RIAA's interest is adverse to that of the artists, it could change. Of course, since most news outlets are owned by members of the RIAA, I don't know how much play it would get.

Cleo

does EMI have any news outlets? i believe they're the one cutting funding to it.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Mr. Dictator,

I don't know. Warner is obviously owned by Time Warner, which also owns CNN. Universal owns MSNBC. They can't be expected to report on things that clearly harm their bottom line. It's just bad business. They're not serving their shareholders' interests.

Cleo

 

[Fifty]

On the plus side, the more fed up people get with the RIAA, the more people will resort to independent labels and exclusively online music and whatnot, which will increase the self-satisfaction of kids who are obsessed with music at the underground and non-main-stream-ness of their preferences!

 

[Mr. Dictator]

On the plus side, the more fed up people get with the RIAA, the more people will resort to independent labels and exclusively online music and whatnot, which will increase the self-satisfaction of kids who are obsessed with music at the underground and non-main-stream-ness of their preferences!

this isnt an issue of the underground vs. the mainstream.

i have no issue with an artist like britney spears making music, i have no issue with people pirating her music or buying it. i have an issue with an organization that is supposedly out there for the artist, only helping themselves and the labels.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Fifty,

But only at first. Once everyone starts listening to the entirely synthesized warblings of the Slovenian brother-sister combo "The Slavhigusbgs," the hipsters will have to look elsewhere for their underground music. They may be self-satisfied in the beginning, but they subsist on their contempt for people like you and me. They'll have to go back to listening to "mainstream" music -- "No way, dude. I'll grant you that "Bye Bye Bye" was a masterpiece, but *NSYNC didn't really fulfill their potential until Celebrity. Everybody knows that."

Cleo

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Fifty,

But only at first. Once everyone starts listening to the entirely synthesized warblings of the Slovenian brother-sister combo "The Slavhigusbgs," the hipsters will have to look elsewhere for their underground music. They may be self-satisfied in the beginning, but they subsist on their contempt for people like you and me. They'll have to go back to listening to "mainstream" music -- "No way, dude. I'll grant you that "Bye Bye Bye" was a masterpiece, but *NSYNC didn't really fulfill their potential until Celebrity. Everybody knows that."

Cleo

this is a world i hope i live to see.

 

[Chris85]

Major music labels are screwing over artists!? Who would of thought?

/sarcasm

 

[BirraImperial]

And people thought pirates where the ones stealing from the artists?

 

[Fifty]

So just granting that the RIAA really is bad, how exactly does that justify piracy?

I mean, to take a vaguely analogous case, killing a bad person isn't ok just because the person is bad!

 

[Bill3000]

So just granting that the RIAA really is bad, how exactly does that justify piracy?

I mean, to take a vaguely analogous case, killing a bad person isn't ok just because the person is bad!

Because intellectual property is theft.

 

[illram]

***disclaimer*** The following is devil's advocate position...

If the Labels own the rights and have the obligation to protect them, and these suits are about protecting their rights, then shouldn't the labels get the $$?

***end devils advocate post.

 

[Supermath]

Mr. Dictator,

I don't know. Warner is obviously owned by Time Warner, which also owns CNN. Universal owns MSNBC. They can't be expected to report on things that clearly harm their bottom line. It's just bad business. They're not serving their shareholders' interests.

Cleo

And so MSNBC will report on the suit against Warner, CNN will report on Universal, and Fox News will report on how the Democrats are the spawn of Satan.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

So just granting that the RIAA really is bad, how exactly does that justify piracy?

I mean, to take a vaguely analogous case, killing a bad person isn't ok just because the person is bad!

I think with non-rival goods it is difficult to truly call it "theft".

 

[carmen510]

God dammit, I wish artists were had the means to be their own distribution firm so we could do away with this kind of legal crap.