WARNER BROS. wouldn't let PRINCE have his GOVERNMENT NAME so he went to WAR AGAINST THE INDUSTRY...

[KENNY DA COOKER]

Born Prince Rogers Nelson the singer, songwriter and multi-instrumentalist , record producer and actor was a renowned innovator in the field of music.

You can also add "prophet" to this list of accolades.

During a dispute with Warner Bros. over his record contract, Prince famously spent much of 1993 performing with the word “Slave” inscribed on his cheek. He came to espouse the view that, because of his contract with Warner, the company owned and controlled him — and owned both his name and his musical output under it.

Prince long prior to the age of digital streaming and fights over intellectual property being led by artists like Garth Brooks and Public Enemy...PRINCE blocked his content from appearing not only on YOUTUBE, but SPOTIFY and numerous outlets as well.

He not only foreseen the lack of compensation to artists for allowing these digital platforms to distribute his music, he also derided the conflict of intrests such as Youtube a subsidiary of Google being a business partner of Warner Bros. records.

Basically these "digital stores" were operating as record companies as well, a fact he acknowledged in his critique of ITunes:

“I don’t see why I should give my new music to iTunes or anyone else,” Prince told the Daily Mirror in the U.K. in 2010. “They won’t pay me an advance for it, and then they get angry when they can’t ge
Prince held steadfast to this ideal even up until his death...

“Record contracts are just like — I’m gonna say the word — slavery,” Prince said as recently as August while speaking to a group of reporters at his Chanhassen, Minnesota, recording studio, Paisley Park. “I would tell any young artist ... don’t sign.”

It's interesting to note that in era full of self professed "bosses" and "self made dons" this 5 foot two man of humility proved to be a REAL REVOLUTIONARY in every sense of the word.

RIP PRINCE...


Refrence:

How Prince Fought The Music Industry And The Internet: A Career Fraught With Legal Battles For Control

 

[Anerdyblackguy]

As a Tidal user all I can say is

 

[DaHNIC82]

If his rightful heir is Taylor Swift, who famously took on Apple last year — and won — that probably won’t do much to console grieving fans. But it’s a start

These fukking CACS just had too

 

[KENNY DA COOKER]

“I don’t see why I should give my new music to iTunes or anyone else,” he said. “They won’t pay me an advance for it and then they get angry when they can’t get it.”

In an interview the following year, he told The Guardian, “We made money [online] before piracy was real crazy. Nobody’s making money now except phone companies, Apple and Google. I’m supposed to go to the White House to talk about copyright protection. It’s like the gold rush out there. Or a carjacking. There’s no boundaries.”

 

[Big Boss]

 

[ba'al]

As a Tidal user all I can say is

Got all his music on vinyl and cd. Not to mention you litterally can get any album you want off the internet for free 99.

 

[mortuus est]

sell your music on bandcamp brehs

 

[big bun]

As a Tidal user all I can say is

The Coli, y'all.

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

SKJ you are trying to talk to kids to talk about something that happened that they don't remember lol.

At the time tons of people thought it was a weird move to change his name to a sign and the PR people at the label were trying to leak shyt out he was crazy. At first I thought it was weird too but once he painted slavery on his face it was actually a big chess move on his part. He ended up getting his way and then all went back to how it should. He was right in every thing he said and he took a really different approach that was very effective. It wasn't barging into meetings, it wasn't any crying in the media, nothing. He answered questions, made shyt difficult for a lot of people at that label, and ultimately got what he wanted. It was a boss move and a half.

I still don't agree with his feelings towards the Internet but understand he comes from an era and lives a life where he doesn't need the Internet's distribution method like others do. If Prince wants a song he sends out his PA to go buy it. I however need to be able to get it on Itunes in the middle of the night when I am working

 

[KENNY DA COOKER]

SKJ you are trying to talk to kids to talk about something that happened that they don't remember lol.

At the time tons of people thought it was a weird move to change his name to a sign and the PR people at the label were trying to leak shyt out he was crazy. At first I thought it was weird too but once he painted slavery on his face it was actually a big chess move on his part. He ended up getting his way and then all went back to how it should. He was right in every thing he said and he took a really different approach that was very effective. It wasn't barging into meetings, it wasn't any crying in the media, nothing. He answered questions, made shyt difficult for a lot of people at that label, and ultimately got what he wanted. It was a boss move and a half.

I still don't agree with his feelings towards the Internet but understand he comes from an era and lives a life where he doesn't need the Internet's distribution method like others do. If Prince wants a song he sends out his PA to go buy it. I however need to be able to get it on Itunes in the middle of the night when I am working

Cali as young artists , consumers and aspiring entrepanuers they need to HEAR THIS

i like yourself when i was young thought it was just some "strange selfish PR move" on prince behalf just to create some buzz and point the blame at Warner for his decline from his PEAK in the early 80's....

but it's became quite obvious when i started venturing into the management/publishing game later as an adult that it was a BIGGER ISSUE..matter of fact a FIGHT he was waging that would be benifical to all artists past and present....

and the fact that he STOOD HIS GROUND and still kept that IDEAL to his death, makes me respect his SINCERITY

alot of "other artists" especially these so-called "boss" rappers would have folded under that pressure

Dude was truly "revolutionary" in what he was doing

Also I feel Prince actions and statements about the industry and how its subversive relationship with artists effects everyone was right an exact as well as PROPHETIC

cause it's dealing with the primary issue affecting all media rights debates....two words: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The industry with the help of the "INTERNET" has robbed us all of our intellectual property (music, visuals, words, thoughts)

Hell you can't even control your content on FACEBOOK or INSTAGRAM.. these so-called "free" social media outlets OWN that too!!


so it's bigger than just writing "slave" on his face...he was bringing about dialogue in 1993 about a subject that has now engulfed us 23 years later....

EVERYTHING HE SAID IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE WAS RIGHT!!!

including his statement about the INTERNET IS "DEAD"...listen to what he said:

“What I meant was that the internet was over for anyone who wants to get paid, and I was right about that,” he says. “Tell me a musician who’s got rich off digital sales. Apple’s doing pretty good though, right?”

Prince: ‘Transcendence. That’s what you want. When that happens – Oh, boy'

Come on Cali.. is he lying?? .....

he's absolutely fukking right.....what artist MAJOR or INDEPENDENT is actually getting wealthy off this shyt DIRECTLY???

sure it can be a platform to create a buzz..but with the bulk of the monetizing revenue being ate up by Youtube and the Major Labels if your signed to one...it really doesn't benifit the artist

case in point thier is a clip of Lyor Cohen on the MSNBC show taking his "Adopted son" YOUNG THUG to the YOUTUBE headquarters located how convieniently in the GOOGLE headquarters in downtown manhattan

Lyor boasts about the numbers Thugger is doing.....like 500 plus million views and counting of all his youtube media content...

now ask yourself HOW MUCH OF THAT 500 million is being generated into revenue for Young Thug?

i think you know the answer to that.............

cause PRINCE surely did

 

[Danie84]

Finally wins His Masters back after decades of fighting for his OWN property, and now he's gone

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

Cali as young artists , consumers and aspiring entrepanuers they need to HEAR THIS

i like yourself when i was young thought it was just some "strange selfish PR move" on prince behalf just to create some buzz and point the blame at Warner for his decline from his PEAK in the early 80's....

but it's became quite obvious when i started venturing into the management/publishing game later as an adult that it was a BIGGER ISSUE..matter of fact a FIGHT he was waging that would be benifical to all artists past and present....

and the fact that he STOOD HIS GROUND and still kept that IDEAL to his death, makes me respect his SINCERITY

alot of "other artists" especially these so-called "boss" rappers would have folded under that pressure

Dude was truly "revolutionary" in what he was doing

Also I feel Prince actions and statements about the industry and how its subversive relationship with artists effects everyone was right an exact as well as PROPHETIC

cause it's dealing with the primary issue affecting all media rights debates....two words: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The industry with the help of the "INTERNET" has robbed us all of our intellectual property (music, visuals, words, thoughts)

Hell you can't even control your content on FACEBOOK or INSTAGRAM.. these so-called "free" social media outlets OWN that too!!


so it's bigger than just writing "slave" on his face...he was bringing about dialogue in 1993 about a subject that has now engulfed us 23 years later....

EVERYTHING HE SAID IN REGARDS TO THIS ISSUE WAS RIGHT!!!

including his statement about the INTERNET IS "DEAD"...listen to what he said:

“What I meant was that the internet was over for anyone who wants to get paid, and I was right about that,” he says. “Tell me a musician who’s got rich off digital sales. Apple’s doing pretty good though, right?”

Prince: ‘Transcendence. That’s what you want. When that happens – Oh, boy'

Come on Cali.. is he lying?? .....

he's absolutely fukking right.....what artist MAJOR or INDEPENDENT is actually getting wealthy off this shyt DIRECTLY???

sure it can be a platform to create a buzz..but with the bulk of the monetizing revenue being ate up by Youtube and the Major Labels if your signed to one...it really doesn't benifit the artist

case in point thier is a clip of Lyor Cohen on the MSNBC show taking his "Adopted son" YOUNG THUG to the YOUTUBE headquarters located how convieniently in the GOOGLE headquarters in downtown manhattan

Lyor boasts about the numbers Thugger is doing.....like 500 plus million views and counting of all his youtube media content...

now ask yourself HOW MUCH OF THAT 500 million is being generated into revenue for Young Thug?

i think you know the answer to that.............

cause PRINCE surely did

All what you said is true and he was a true boss, made a true power move, and outside of his amazing catalog did so much more. He was dead on about the music industry and while he wasn't the first to talk about abuses he did it in such an obscure way that they didn't know how to fight him other than pass through the media he was crazy, he lost his mind, etc. It sort of worked too because that is what we all thought via Kurt Loader right? He ended up winning in the end though. It's truly something to reflect on and prop up.

As for who got rich off the Internet? Tons of people. To act like no one is getting paid off the Internet is just not true. Is the average every day artist? No. They weren't making money either way. And he's certainly right that Apple is making tons of money but it's at the expense mainly of the major labels as they swiped a distribution method they should have owned. DJ Mustard and Busta Rhymes got fat checks for letting Google Music give away their album for free. Lil Wayne has made millions off Pandora over the years, a revenue stream that never existed at all about 10-15 years ago. Same goes for Apple music, Tidal, and Spotify. While they are not retiring off streams, it's a revenue source. Not like they were getting paid off radio before so this is slightly better. As corny as the digital download ringtones were, Fat Joe bought a fukking mansion off Lean Back. Soulja Boy became rich because of videos he posted on YouTube. Now while all these instances are rare and not the norm to write off the Internet completely is not right. That doesn't make Prince wrong in his message but it does make him wrong for trying to shut it all down. People consume media and music differently these days. No reason to hold back what the people want.

You make a lot less money on streams and 99 cent itunes downloads than you did selling a full album in the 90s at 18.99 a clip, sure. However having access to 200-300 million people world wide does add up. Even if you are making 20 cents instead of 45 cents.

 

[Apollo Creed]

Still remember as a kid not understanding why he changed up and went by the symbol and the Media was pushing that he did it because he was "crazy" and wanted to be "different".

smh

 

[KENNY DA COOKER]

All what you said is true and he was a true boss, made a true power move, and outside of his amazing catalog did so much more. He was dead on about the music industry and while he wasn't the first to talk about abuses he did it in such an obscure way that they didn't know how to fight him other than pass through the media he was crazy, he lost his mind, etc. It sort of worked too because that is what we all thought via Kurt Loader right? He ended up winning in the end though. It's truly something to reflect on and prop up.

As for who got rich off the Internet? Tons of people. To act like no one is getting paid off the Internet is just not true. Is the average every day artist? No. They weren't making money either way. And he's certainly right that Apple is making tons of money but it's at the expense mainly of the major labels as they swiped a distribution method they should have owned. DJ Mustard and Busta Rhymes got fat checks for letting Google Music give away their album for free. Lil Wayne has made millions off Pandora over the years, a revenue stream that never existed at all about 10-15 years ago. Same goes for Apple music, Tidal, and Spotify. While they are not retiring off streams, it's a revenue source. Not like they were getting paid off radio before so this is slightly better. As corny as the digital download ringtones were, Fat Joe bought a fukking mansion off Lean Back. Soulja Boy became rich because of videos he posted on YouTube. Now while all these instances are rare and not the norm to write off the Internet completely is not right. That doesn't make Prince wrong in his message but it does make him wrong for trying to shut it all down. People consume media and music differently these days. No reason to hold back what the people want.

You make a lot less money on streams and 99 cent itunes downloads than you did selling a full album in the 90s at 18.99 a clip, sure. However having access to 200-300 million people world wide does add up. Even if you are making 20 cents instead of 45 cents.

dude it's not even a viable revenue source once you factor in all the splits with the publishing societies and the label and administration fees..

I know you rep CALI hard...but cut down on that Medical Kush dawg..it's got your Jaw talking crazy

Don't spend it all at once, artists: Pandora is paying out $0.0001 more per stream than it was last year - Music Business Worldwide
DON’T SPEND IT ALL AT ONCE, ARTISTS: PANDORA IS PAYING OUT $0.0001 MORE PER STREAM THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR
175 SHARES

APRIL 26, 2015
BY TIM INGHAM



Pandora has revealed that its royalty payments to SoundExchange, the US licensing body which collects performance royalties on behalf of record labels and artists, have just increased by 8%.

The news was confirmed in a call with investors following Pandora’s Q1 fiscal results announcement on Thursday (April 23), in which it posted a three-month net loss of $48.3m.

In what Pandora CEO Brian McAndrews (pictured) called a “scheduled annual step-up”, Pandora has from January 1 been paying out an average $0.0014 per ad-funded stream and $0.0024 per premium stream to SoundExchange.

An 8% rise in SoundExchange royalties might sound impressive, but in per-stream terms, it’s a micro-increase: up $0.0001 from $0.0013 (ad-funded) and $0.0023 (premium) in 2014.

In Q1 2015, Pandora pulled in $52m in subscription income, down on the $53.7m it accrued in the same period of 2014.

The company is believed to have somewhere between 3m and 4m subscribers, making up around 4.4% of its total customer base.

Pandora paid out $126m in ‘content acquisitions costs’ in Q1 – essentially royalties to licensing bodies such as SoundExchange, BMI and ASCAP. That amounted to more than half of its total revenue.

Comparing Pandora to Spotify directly is no simple task: one is obviously a more passive ‘radio’ service, while the other on-demand streaming option. But Spotify has publicly revealed its average per-stream payout to rights holders – blended across premium and ad-funded tiers – stands at around $0.007.

Pandora will heads to federal court in the US on Monday (April 27) to argue its case to the Copyright Royalty Board over what its US statutory royalty payouts will be to SoundExchange from 2016-2022.

“OVERALL OUR OUR NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN EXPANDED IN Q1… DESPITE THE INCREASE IN CONTENT COST IN JANUARY DUE TO THE SCHEDULED ANNUAL STEP-UP IN SOUNDEXCHANGE ROYALTY RATES, WHICH INCREASED TO 8% THIS YEAR.”

BRIAN MCANDREWS, PANDORA

The radio firm is attempting to bring down its current per-stream payout, while SoundExchange wants to double it to $0.0025.

The CRB will also decide which ‘radio’ services amongst Pandora, iHeart Radio, Sirius XM and interactive and which are non-interactive. Interactive services, such as Spotify and iTunes, tend to agree royalty rates directly with copyright holders such as Universal Music, Sony Music and Warner Music.

Meanwhile, Pandora is also busy fighting publisher/songwriter US collection societies BMI and ASCAP over the performance royalties received by their members.

BMI currently receives 1.75% of Pandora’s revenue – around $4m in Q1 2015. But the digital company wants to reduce the figure to 1.7% to match the rate paid by most radio stations.

The ASCAP rate court ruled last year that Pandora must give 1.85% of its annual revenue to the BMI rival.

Despite the increase, Sony/ATV’s CEO & Chairman Martin Bandier slammed the decision, calling it “woefully inadequate” and a “clear defeat for songwriters”.

i REST MY CASE

 

[OnlyInCalifornia]

dude it's not even a viable revenue source once you factor in all the splits with the publishing societies and the label and administration fees..

I know you rep CALI hard...but cut down on that Medical Kush dawg..it's got your Jaw talking crazy

Don't spend it all at once, artists: Pandora is paying out $0.0001 more per stream than it was last year - Music Business Worldwide
DON’T SPEND IT ALL AT ONCE, ARTISTS: PANDORA IS PAYING OUT $0.0001 MORE PER STREAM THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR
175 SHARES

APRIL 26, 2015
BY TIM INGHAM



Pandora has revealed that its royalty payments to SoundExchange, the US licensing body which collects performance royalties on behalf of record labels and artists, have just increased by 8%.

The news was confirmed in a call with investors following Pandora’s Q1 fiscal results announcement on Thursday (April 23), in which it posted a three-month net loss of $48.3m.

In what Pandora CEO Brian McAndrews (pictured) called a “scheduled annual step-up”, Pandora has from January 1 been paying out an average $0.0014 per ad-funded stream and $0.0024 per premium stream to SoundExchange.

An 8% rise in SoundExchange royalties might sound impressive, but in per-stream terms, it’s a micro-increase: up $0.0001 from $0.0013 (ad-funded) and $0.0023 (premium) in 2014.

In Q1 2015, Pandora pulled in $52m in subscription income, down on the $53.7m it accrued in the same period of 2014.

The company is believed to have somewhere between 3m and 4m subscribers, making up around 4.4% of its total customer base.

Pandora paid out $126m in ‘content acquisitions costs’ in Q1 – essentially royalties to licensing bodies such as SoundExchange, BMI and ASCAP. That amounted to more than half of its total revenue.

Comparing Pandora to Spotify directly is no simple task: one is obviously a more passive ‘radio’ service, while the other on-demand streaming option. But Spotify has publicly revealed its average per-stream payout to rights holders – blended across premium and ad-funded tiers – stands at around $0.007.

Pandora will heads to federal court in the US on Monday (April 27) to argue its case to the Copyright Royalty Board over what its US statutory royalty payouts will be to SoundExchange from 2016-2022.

“OVERALL OUR OUR NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN EXPANDED IN Q1… DESPITE THE INCREASE IN CONTENT COST IN JANUARY DUE TO THE SCHEDULED ANNUAL STEP-UP IN SOUNDEXCHANGE ROYALTY RATES, WHICH INCREASED TO 8% THIS YEAR.”

BRIAN MCANDREWS, PANDORA

The radio firm is attempting to bring down its current per-stream payout, while SoundExchange wants to double it to $0.0025.

The CRB will also decide which ‘radio’ services amongst Pandora, iHeart Radio, Sirius XM and interactive and which are non-interactive. Interactive services, such as Spotify and iTunes, tend to agree royalty rates directly with copyright holders such as Universal Music, Sony Music and Warner Music.

Meanwhile, Pandora is also busy fighting publisher/songwriter US collection societies BMI and ASCAP over the performance royalties received by their members.

BMI currently receives 1.75% of Pandora’s revenue – around $4m in Q1 2015. But the digital company wants to reduce the figure to 1.7% to match the rate paid by most radio stations.

The ASCAP rate court ruled last year that Pandora must give 1.85% of its annual revenue to the BMI rival.

Despite the increase, Sony/ATV’s CEO & Chairman Martin Bandier slammed the decision, calling it “woefully inadequate” and a “clear defeat for songwriters”.

i REST MY CASE

Sorry breh, case re opened...

Pandora Reveals How Much It Pays Artists, Claims Drake, Lil Wayne Rake In $3 Million A Year

"Popular artists such as Adele, Jason Aldean and Wiz Khalifa are making more than $1 million every year, while some — like Drake and Lil Wayne — are raking in almost $3 million annually."

"For over two thousand artists Pandora will pay over $10,000 dollars each over the next 12 months (including one of my favorites, the late jazz pianist Oscar Peterson), and for more than 800 we’ll pay over $50,000, more than the income of the average American household…"

This is an old article that doesn't include Apple Music or Spotify.

Again, not saying people are becoming the hood bill gates off these but it is A LOT more than the radio spins they made ZERO dollars off of. So that right there puts them in a better situation, thanks to the Internet.

As far as distribution method again, people can buy songs off itunes all over the world and do. Before a guy like Problem and DJ Quik could not put out an album, by themselves, and have access to the market in Japan like they did. Now they can because of the Internet.

The internet is not perfect or even great but to write it off completely is 100,000% wrong. Period. Case closed. People's Court OUT.