I don’t subscribe to Apple Music but I checked the iTunes Store and nothing came up. I already knew SpamSandwich was asking the right questions but it may also be that this guy’s work isn’t even available through Apple. (Or maybe Apple pulled it?)
maestro64 said: ... But he obviously found a lawyer who is willing to waste his time and money in hope for a big pay out. ...
Or, maybe more likely, the lawyer found him.
Think about it -- look at CD Baby, go onto Apple Music, find a plaintiff, sue. That's also why the unspecified 2014 case is interesting. I'd be willing to bet the reason the lawyer knows about it is because he brought it...
maestro64 said: ... But he obviously found a lawyer who is willing to waste his time and money in hope for a big pay out. ...
Or, maybe more likely, the lawyer found him.
Think about it -- look at CD Baby, go onto Apple Music, find a plaintiff, sue. That's also why the unspecified 2014 case is interesting. I'd be willing to bet the reason the lawyer knows about it is because he brought it...
Hmmm. Could this be used to create some kind of legal precedence for a much larger ($$$) client?
Maybe the problem is Bryan Eich is a nobody? Something to think about anyway.
Maybe he is. What does that have to do with his right to do this? Are you — and the others here who appear to agree with you —saying that he had to be aTaylor Swift to take on a big company? If so, you sound like a third-rate corporate lobbyist.
I’ll have you know I’m a first-rate corporate lobbyist.
/s
Despite the "/s" tag, I have wondered about that... ;-)
Maybe the problem is Bryan Eich is a nobody? Something to think about anyway.
Maybe he is. What does that have to do with his right to do this? Are you — and the others here who appear to agree with you —saying that he had to be aTaylor Swift to take on a big company? If so, you sound like a third-rate corporate lobbyist.
No. The point is that if no one downloaded or streamed his music, then Apple doesn't owe him anything and the problem is NOT that Apple purposely misreported. I've seen Apple's royalty statements for downloads and they're very comprehensive. While sure, they could add some algorithms to cheat, it really looks like it's taken right from the database. I haven't seen streaming statements, but I assume they're very similar.
Secondly, he needs to check his contract with CDBaby. If CDBaby didn't have the right to give his music to Apple, then he should be suing them. If they did, even if he was unaware, that's his problem and not Apple's. He contends that under the compulsory license laws, Apple had to notify him when they streamed his music. I'm not sure that's the case (I've developed rights management systems, so I have some background in this, although I'm not a lawyer). Compulsory license is usually in effect when one artist covers the work of another writer. They have to ask permission if the work hasn't been recorded yet, but under the compulsory license rules, they don't need permission if it's already been recorded and released. Or something close to that.
I'm not claiming that Apple is absolutely in the right. Just that they might not be in the wrong either. This sounds to me like an unknown artist who is pissed that he never made any money from his recordings, but that's the name of the game these days. More than ever it's a hit driven market but even the biggest hits sell far less than they ever did. Even known artists mostly don't make very much from streaming and in the U.S., downloading is now down to just 19.6% of the market - just slightly higher than physical media (16.3%). It's all about streaming now for better or worse. There's a generation of music fans who no longer feel the need to own anything. Also, Eich doesn't come up searching iTunes. There's a Brian Eichelberger who comes up in Spotify. Don't know if that's the same artist or not.
Frankly, this sounds like a guy who thinks just by suing Apple, they'll pay him off to go away. What he might not realize is that in class action suits, the lawyers wind up with the biggest chunk of the money and everybody else gets pennies.
Utter bullshit! Why would Apple want to do that to no-name artists? Besides, who downloads music anymore? Streaming, ok?
Yeah. F*** the musicians and their music.
I personally find streaming sad but inevitable. To support the artists I enjoy I always buy their tracks or the physical albums. But I find it hard to believe that Apple would deliberately delete streams.
bestkeptsecret said: [...] I find it hard to believe that Apple would deliberately delete streams.
Maybe not "deliberately." I found it hard to believe that iTunes Match would delete music libraries from users' hard drives, yet that's exactly what happened to some people.
Obviously it wasn't deliberate, but it's also obvious that Apple's software efforts have sometimes had serious or potentially serious flaws. The last quarter of 2017 has seen some particularly stark examples. Maybe under certain conditions Apple's music reporting system deletes data in a way Apple didn't intend. I'm not saying that *IS* what's happening, just that it doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility.
Hi , for nearly eight years third parties been scooping my songs off the music aggregators I've dealt with and selling them without notifying me , to web music stores ... and that is happening even after I had taken the songs down from companies like TuneCore , Ditto Music , ReverbNation ,etc.. No sales reports , no royalties , no notices of nothing , they just go on right ahead and grab them from the internet ... and so far there are no music lawyers or music societies wanting to help me get them to take them down , is as though they know and are complicit to these shark music corporations!
To add to that they say they don't make money from the songs because they say they have not made sales and that when they do they will contact me ... and that's like way over five years and countless web music stores I have observed , so why then do they continue to offer products ( my songs ) that none wants?
Music is like a candy bar , once you hear it , then it's digested and gone , and that's exactly how streaming behavior effect functions , and once you tried one candy you want to go and taste another kind of candy bar , and all candy bars are generally forgotten and discarded ... it's massive waste of time to hand them out freely as does with business of streaming ..... simply it's how the mass psychology thinks and acts!
Comments
Think about it -- look at CD Baby, go onto Apple Music, find a plaintiff, sue. That's also why the unspecified 2014 case is interesting. I'd be willing to bet the reason the lawyer knows about it is because he brought it...
Secondly, he needs to check his contract with CDBaby. If CDBaby didn't have the right to give his music to Apple, then he should be suing them. If they did, even if he was unaware, that's his problem and not Apple's. He contends that under the compulsory license laws, Apple had to notify him when they streamed his music. I'm not sure that's the case (I've developed rights management systems, so I have some background in this, although I'm not a lawyer). Compulsory license is usually in effect when one artist covers the work of another writer. They have to ask permission if the work hasn't been recorded yet, but under the compulsory license rules, they don't need permission if it's already been recorded and released. Or something close to that.
I'm not claiming that Apple is absolutely in the right. Just that they might not be in the wrong either. This sounds to me like an unknown artist who is pissed that he never made any money from his recordings, but that's the name of the game these days. More than ever it's a hit driven market but even the biggest hits sell far less than they ever did. Even known artists mostly don't make very much from streaming and in the U.S., downloading is now down to just 19.6% of the market - just slightly higher than physical media (16.3%). It's all about streaming now for better or worse. There's a generation of music fans who no longer feel the need to own anything. Also, Eich doesn't come up searching iTunes. There's a Brian Eichelberger who comes up in Spotify. Don't know if that's the same artist or not.
Frankly, this sounds like a guy who thinks just by suing Apple, they'll pay him off to go away. What he might not realize is that in class action suits, the lawyers wind up with the biggest chunk of the money and everybody else gets pennies.
I personally find streaming sad but inevitable. To support the artists I enjoy I always buy their tracks or the physical albums. But I find it hard to believe that Apple would deliberately delete streams.
Obviously it wasn't deliberate, but it's also obvious that Apple's software efforts have sometimes had serious or potentially serious flaws. The last quarter of 2017 has seen some particularly stark examples. Maybe under certain conditions Apple's music reporting system deletes data in a way Apple didn't intend. I'm not saying that *IS* what's happening, just that it doesn't seem beyond the realm of possibility.