The Ways in Which Music Copyrights Are Exploited - Essay Example

Ways in which Music Copyrights are exploited The music industry has evolved greatly in the last fifty years.Musicians in the 1960s did not have many avenues to make money out of their work compared to what majority of the musicians has currently. Advances of technology have increased avenues of secondary exploitation of their rights. However, the emergence of these new avenues presents new challenges for the master owners, and publishing companies to reap maximum benefit from any composition. The challenge for the majority of the publishing companies today involves administrational limitations in a technologically competent world. This paper will highlight the developments of revenue pathways in the last fifty years and the implications of these to the publishing companies the United Kingdom and European region. For a long time, it has proved a challenge for songwriters to oversee and exercise control over their songs. The entire venture involves granting licenses and collecting the revenue from multiple users of the song, responsibilities that the songwriter cannot handle personally. Publishing companies often serve as a great relief to songwriters. Publishing companies exercise control over music composition (Poe, 2006:110-112). Publishing companies often secure recording of the songwriter’s material. In addition, the publisher ensures secure use of the song in other media such as television, film, radio and video games (Beall, 2004:1). In addition, the publishing company seeks performance avenues by artists. It is the role of a publishing company to ensure effective management of licenses as well as collect royalties from all users of the composition. Moreover, publishing companies zealously strive to promote each composition under their care in order to increase revenue pathways. It is worth noting that some songwriters prefer to control their copyrights instead of assigning that responsibility to a publisher. Music publishing became a successful venture in the 19th century. For a long time, publishers produced song sheets. However, they were selective on the type of songs they would publish. A song had to prove itself worthy good outcome in the business. The impact brought about by phonograph and various broadcasting industries became a mark of the time. The emergence of these led to markedly increased sales of song sheets and phonogram sheets. Initially, the music industry relied on a single source of income. The emerging new forms of media transformed the entire picture of the music business. There were new revenue pathways such as record sales, broadcast, films, and live performances. The emerging sources of income in the industry included performance income, mechanical income and synchronization income. Performance income is the revenue earned from users utilizing the song in public performance. This introduces the role of performance rights societies who manage the performance licenses. Mechanical income emanates from users utilizing music copyrights through mechanical reproduction. In cases where other forms of media used a song, then they would pay a synchronization income, in addition to other fees related to reproduction. In the UK setting, mechanical copyright administering is the role of the mechanical copyright protection society (MCPS). The songwriter assigns the MCPS the responsibility of administering the licensing. In actual sense, M CPS acts as an agent for the right in question. There are several ways of making deals with MCPS although a blanket license is the commonest option. A blanket license grants the user permission of different forms of mechanical reproduction (Parker, 2004:78). The 1970s came with some changes into the scene. Television became a thing for every householder, changing the music industry. A new revenue pathway of television commercials emerged. If commercials used a song, then they had to pay a royalty for the song. In addition, the presence of the television opened a new front where movies and films became very common. Movies became very efficient marketing places for songs (Cooper, 2005:4). All the new avenues required the media to pay royalties to the publishing companies. During this time, a new promotion avenue through video production appeared. Publishing companies now had a new revenue pathway (Frith, and Marshall, 2004:114). In addition to the mechanical license often offered for making sound recording copies, the synchronization license that permitted the use of song to make videos of a song emerged. Movies with a collection of the best hits occurred in this era, increasing the sale of tracks. A good example in history is the Saturday night fever songs. In this era, cassettes and sheets made incredible sales. The 1980s came with changes in the music industry (Tschmuck, 2012:168). With the availability of home taping equipment, the sales of long-playing tapes declined greatly. Through this venture, people made copies of music without any royalties returning to the publishing company. However, the launch of MTV and several ITVs boosted sales through synchronization. In addition, in the middle of the decade, more stadiums were emerging and live performances were on the increase. Towards the 1990’s CDs emerged replacing the LP collections that existed and presented a new revenue pathway (Wikstrom, 2010:8). Publishing companies earned royalties from the sales of CDs. CDs had extensive market because people were buying CD versions of albums they had played earlier. In addition, play station games that featured music emerged towards the conclusion of the decade presenting a new revenue pathway. In addition, contemporary movies were becoming very common, and there were significant advances in the media sector that favored the music industry. Music made more sales due to increasing technological advancements. The appearance of songs in movies prompted peopled to buy copiers of the music. Videos of songs became an additional feature of the 1980s (Batchelor and Stoddart, 2007:114). The 21st century brought about numerous changes in the music industry. Advances of technology brought about the digital world of music. The old players of physical music marketing that indulged in the marketing, creation, production, distribution and promotion remained in place (Continuum, 2010:12). Artists, media, and physical retailers still did their work, but this happened alongside new players in the market such as electronic retailers, device manufacturers, and web players. In addition, publishing companies have become more aware of their copyrights. There are numerous avenues of accessing music both physically and online (Harrison 130-140). The increase of players in the music industry has led to the redefinition of the rules of copyrights. The United Kingdom publishing industry has defined the emerging revenue pathways and sought to induce licensing in all of these avenues. There are licensing procedures for all online copying and synchronization. There are numerous sites available online where the audience can access music (IFPI, 2012:6). These include YouTube, Facebook, Itunes, MySpace, music platform, online broadcasting, and other music download sites (Bahanovich, and Collopy, 2009:9). Managers and owners of these sites should pay royalties for making covers. This has necessitated the availability of digital mechanical and synchronization licenses (Sparrow, 2006:125). In addition, VCDs and DVDs have become a common thing. Regulation of the copying of music required stringent measures, in the 21st century (Hooper, and Lynch, 2012:50). In addition, mechanical and synchronization licenses have become a requiring for video gaming companies that are growing rapidly and using tracks in their videos (Macmillan, 2005:159). These circumstances have forced the United Kingdom publishing industry to change its tactics in the business (Alikhan, Mashelkar, and 2009:5). Faced with a complex responsibility to exploit all the new revenue pathways, the industry has made remarkable progress. There is an emphasis on the legal recognition of intellectual property. It becomes hectic for publishing companies to administer all the licensing work and make all negotiations on the cost of licenses. The emergence of collection societies consisting of several publishing companies, authors, and performers seeking to pursue copyrights together (Harrison 297). These societies are usually private entities, but often subject to the government control. A copyright act instituted in 1988 by the United Kingdom government regulates the activities of collection societies. The activities involve a practical and economical approach that eases the collection of royalties. The copyright owners have security that they will receive their fair dues (Frith & Marshall, 2004:32). Since there is legal mode of negotiation, licensing occurs at a fixed rate making it easier for the owners. Other benefits of collections societies involve reduction of administration costs. In addition, different right owners have an opportunity to form alliances that oversee all online management of licenses (Harrison 298). These collection societies operate on regional basis. They ensure the full exploitation of all revenue pathways. They negotiate mechanical licenses for physical and online copying of music. In addition, they administer all deals concerning blanket licenses that do not operate on fixed rates (Harrison 297). Moreover, they regulate any form of synchronization and broadcasting and podcasting. For broadcasts and podcasts, collection societies offer blanket licenses that allow radio stations, banks and other TV channels to play music to a larger audience. There are licenses for each act that involves making covers for any copyright work. With the increase of online revenue pathways, it becomes a challenge for collection societies to set rates for royalties in the online realm. There are different collection societies operating in the U.K (Gowers, 2006:94). These include, Video Performance Limited, Phonographic Performance Limited, the Performing Right Society Limited, and Mechanical Copyright Protection Society Limited. Each of these societies has varying requirements for entry and subscription. Collection societies act on a global from front (Page, and Carey, 2011). They act as representations of their members even in other regions (Harrison 299). Some of these societies have existed in the business for a long time. However, majority of publishing companies receive only a part of their royalties because the collection societies must make deductions as returns for the administration work (Harrison 300-301). The situation becomes worse if collection societies from, different countries are striking deal because each of the societies must make its deductions (Castendyk, & Dommering, 2008:169). This has opened up new avenues of administration that seek to ensure that right owners and publishing companies receive almost 100% of their royalties (Graber, 2005:35). Tunecore has risen to exploit this business opportunity. Tunecore operates online and its members can keep a track of all its dealings and even sign up for reception of royalties from their website (Butler, 2012:1). This eases the work for the right owners who do not necessarily need to join collection societies. Tunecore strives to serve as a direct affiliate of Anglo-American societies to reduce the administration costs incurred through operation via collection societies. In addition, Tunecore has advanced to provide right owners with an avenue to collect their royalties and grant licenses (Butler, 2012:5). It is evident that technology has increased new revenue pathways for the sale of music (Leurdijk, and Nieuwenhuis, 2012:8). There are different licenses in existence today that seek to protect the rights of intellectual property owners in the music industry. Some licenses operate at fixed rates while others are negotiable. Right owners have resulted to selling their rights to publishing companies that are able to publicize and grant licenses. In other cases, right owners and publishing companies form collection societies in order to magnify their bargaining power. However, the deductions of collection societies leaving the right societies with little of the total royalty paid. Exploitation of these revenue pathways has come with its challenges (Varian, 2004:5). Setting the rates for licensing especially for online covers and synchronization has become difficult. However, the availability of mechanical licenses for all the copying digitally and physically, blanket licenses of different rates, synchronization licenses and other fees payable to watch performances ensure a protection of the intellectual copyrights of musicians. The advancing technology has increased the revenue pathways greatly. However, with the increasing streams, it becomes a challenge to protect copyrights. Bibliography Alikhan, S., & Mashelkar, R. A. 2009. Intellectual property and competitive strategies in the 21st century. Austin:Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Bahanovich, D., and Collopy, D. 2009. Music experience and Behavior in Young People. UK Music, 23(2011). Available from http://www.ukmusic.org/assets/media/uk_music_uni_of_herts_09.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Batchelor, B., & Stoddart, S. 2007. The 1980s. Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Greenwood Press. Beall, E. 2004. Making music make money: an insiders guide to becoming your own music publisher. Boston, MA [u.a.]: Berklee Press [u.a.]. Butler, S. 2012. TuneCore, a game changer. The international News and Analysis Report, (7), 2012. Available from: www.MusicConfidential.biz [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Castendyk, O., & Dommering, E. 2008. European media law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International. Continuum. 2010. Directory of Publishing 2011: United Kingdom and The Republic of Ireland. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. Cooper, Mark N. (2005) Time for the Recording Industry to face the Music: The Political, Social and Economic Benefits of Peer-to-Peer Communication Networks. Available from: http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/benefitsofpeertopeer.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Frith, S. & Marshall, L. 2004. Continuum International Publishing Group. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Frith, S., & Marshall, L. 2004. Music and copyright. Edinburgh:Edinburgh Univ. Press. Garello, P. Copyright in Music Industry. Available from: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/c-essential.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Gowers, A. 2006. Gowers review of intellectual property. Norwich, HMSO. Graber, C. B. 2005. Digital rights management: the end of collecting societies? Berne, Staempfli [u.a.]. Harrison, Ann. 2011.Music--the Business: The Essential Guide to the Law and the Deals. London: Virgin Books. Hooper, R., and Lynch, R. 2012. Streamlining copyright licensing for the digital age. Available from: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/dce-report-phase2.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. IFPI. 2012. Digital Music Report 2012. Available from http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/DMR2012.pdf[Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Leurdijk, A., and Nieuwenhuis, O. 2012. Statistical, Ecosystems and Competitiveness Analysis of the Media and Content Industries: The Music Industry. Available from http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/ISG/documents/FINALMusicreportwithcovers_EB_Corrected_02.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Macmillan, F. 2005. New directions in copyright law 1. Cheltenham [u.a.]: Elgar. Page, W., and Carey, C. 2011. Adding up the UK music industry 2010. Economic Insight, 23 on 4th august 2011. Parker, N. 2004. Music business: infrastructure, practice, and law. London, Sweet & Maxwell. Poe, R., & Poe, R. 2006. The new songwriters guide to music publishing everything you need to know to make the best publishing deals for your songs. Cincinnati, Ohio:Writers Digest Books. Sparrow, A. 2006. Music distribution and the internet: a legal guide for the music business. Aldershot [u.a.], Gower. Tschmuck, P. 2012. Creativity and innovation in the music industry. Heidelberg: Springer. Varian, Hal R. (2004) Copying and Copyright Journal of Economic Perspectives. Available From: http://wwwpub.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/knowledge_goods/varian.pdf [Accessed on 22 October 2012]. Wikstrom, P. 2010. The music industry: music in the cloud. Cambridge [u.a.]:Polity Press. Read More