ContentSphere - Music & Media in an Online Culture

Browsing my Google Reader today I stumbled into Kyle Bylin’s interview with Jay Frank of Futurehit.DNA and CMT (a division of MTV Networks) at hypebot. Jay’s new book “FutureHit.DNA - How The Digital Revolution Is Changing Top 10 Songs” you can download for free on his site.

Well, of course the digital revolution has changed music. But there are some claims of his that I do not necessarily agree to in the way Jay puts it. It’s a bit of context that’s missing.

First of all, you might easily forget about the fact that he’s talking about chart music only. During the interview I can’t help getting the feeling the majority of musicians (from Jay’s point of view) are merely in it for the money. Rules to follow, issues to avoid - just to make sure your song makes the Top 10.

Honestly, the probability any song makes it there is very low. Let’s face it: It’s near zero. You might as well spend your time and money on lotteries.

Continue reading "Why Jay Frank (FutureHit.DNA/CMT) Fails: It's..." »

I started this article two days ago (which isn’t quite correct because I started writing it about a week ago), though I have yet to come to the main part - the lessons themselves. Hope you enjoy, have your read.
Continue reading "Music Business: Lessons In Free Strategies From..." »

If talking to independent musicians about the benefits of distributing content for free you most certainly will come across four arguments in monolithic defense.


Please note: I won’t discuss copyright issues in here. But no matter if you give away your song for free to billions of people or if you sell a licence to one company - your copyright in your song remains unaffected. Please keep that in mind.

Continue reading "Music Business: Lessons In Free Strategies From..." »

[English translation of part 3 is coming soon. Due to organisational tasks at all2gethernow, it will take an additional one or two days to translate. Since the text is available in German already, I just posted it in advance for all German readers.]

Teil 1&2 findet Ihr hier:
“Die GEMA-Vermutung als Markteintrittsbarriere (Teil 1/3)”
“Die GEMA-Vermutung als Markteintrittsbarriere (Teil 2/3)”

Glaube ist gut, Wissen ist besser.

Gleichgültig, wie das Urteil eines (notwendigen) Sachverständigen zum Thema aussieht, der Beleg für die Verfügbarkeit einer hinreichenden Größe frei lizensierten Materials muss vor Gericht erbracht werden. Denn die GEMA-Vermutung ist gängige Rechtsprechung und wird erst vor dem BGH endgültig widerlegt werden können. Aber die Schwierigkeit liegt in der Nachprüfbarkeit. Der GEMA liegen neben ihren stets aktuellen Geschäftszahlen natürlich auch die Zahlen der zu verwertenden Titel vor - wo aber sind die belegbaren Zahlen frei lizenzierter Stücke?

Aufmerksamkeit.

Darüber hinaus hat die GEMA Pressesprecher und Lobbyisten. Nicht die Künstler, die ihre Werke GEMA-frei anbieten. Für die Verbraucher existieren letztere Künstler nicht. Selbst wenn international renommierte Künstler wie Trent Reznor oder die Smashing Pumpkins Titel unter Creative Commons veröffentlichen - die Masse des Publikums nimmt es nicht wahr. Es erscheint unwichtig. Die meiste Beachtung für diese Aktionen, Marketingstrategien und teilweise auch Geschäftsmodelle wird den Künstlern durch das Web zuteil. Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 3/3)" »

For parts 1&3, please go here:
Part 1, Part 3


There are two issues, and each one constitutes a well functioning entry barrier in itself. But, in conjunction they are seamlessly joint: The GEMA presumption, and closely linked the free licence composers’ and providers’ scattered acting.

Why are they that closely linked?

First off, GEMA is responsible for maintaining the GEMA presumption. Secondly, GEMA does not allow members to license selected works under Creative Commons. Free licence composers are kept out of the market without having any organisation representing them. It is plain to see why Germany’s collection society does not want to offer billing and administration of Creative Commons licences (although they could get a good revenue by doing so). But, in the end this results in increasing the demand an alternative to today’s common collection society. Latest by launch of an alternative platform, organisation or institution the GEMA presumption is going to fall. Now this isn’t at all what GEMA wants. Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 2/3)" »

For parts 2&3, please go here:
Part 2, Part 3

Note.

Quite often, in any part of this article I’m using the term “free licensed” or “free licences”. That might be a bit misleading. Please take your time to understand it in the meaning of “independently licensed from any collection society (in particular GEMA)”. It does not mean that for example Creative Commons licences are always free of charge. The range of Creative Commons allows for different licences (in contrast to GEMA by the way).

Most of them (at least with music) will probably be free of charge for private use. However, commercial use in most cases depends on certain conditions and the explicit permission of the author plus paying a licence fee.

I’m aware of the fact that the line between private use and commercial use is not that clear, and it is not explicitly defined by Creative Commons. The definition rather relies on the author being the licenser. But in case you are about to license a work - just ask the author if the purpose you are intending is considered private or commercial use. The metadata of any work licensed under Creative Commons should allow for a contact option.

A slight case of overbombing.

Unfortunately, usage of content licensed by Creative Commons or other free licences in Germany pretty often fails because of the so called GEMA presumption. As of now, due to this presumption, if played, performed or copied for commercial use or in public in Germany, every work of music has to be reported to German collection society GEMA. This applies for composers playing their own music as well as for songs not licensed with GEMA - say, Creative Commons. This is confirmed and supported by German jurisdiction.
Continue reading "The GEMA Presumption as an Entry Barrier (Pt. 1/3)" »

I don’t know whether this one has hit US shores already - or if there is any other country that knows about it. But there’s something going on in Germany.

Again, it’s about licensing. We already had our share of GEMA within the past few weeks (see Rapidshare and Jamendo). Read about it at ContentSphere, or do it over at TechDirt. GEMA, Germany’s only collections society, still is surprisingly entertaining (if you’re into cynism).

But, there’s some uprising fresh breeze, and it’s coming from Germany’s most southward located town: Sonthofen.
Continue reading "Germany's GEMA: Resistance is (not) futile" »