[governance] Pandora Goes After Artist Royalties In Big Risk

[Riaz K Tayob]

Jason Cherkis <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-cherkis> Become a fan 
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/becomeFan.php?of=hp_blogger_Jason%20Cherkis> 


jason.cherkis at huffingtonpost.com <mailto:jason.cherkis at huffingtonpost.com>


  Pandora Goes After Artist Royalties In Big Risk

Posted: 12/04/2012 6:19 pm EST Updated: 12/04/2012 6:34 pm EST


WASHINGTON -- Since Pandora launched its Internet radio service in 2007, 
it has grown from a startup facing near-bankruptcy to a leader of the 
digital streaming market. With more than 60 million users in the past 
month, the company is now estimated to be worth billions, with revenue 
doubling every year. "On the growth side, it's been a wonderful story," 
founder Tim Westergren declared at a recent conference 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvFuMhbU_8g>. "Our listenership just 
keeps exploding, and so does our revenue."

It's quite a success for a company that sold itself as an 
artist-friendly, transformational force that didn't just make radio cool 
again, but also offered -- through royalty fees -- a potential path to 
prosperity for musicians who've seen physical record sales plummet. 
Westergren is a musician himself, and takes pride in championing indies 
and majors alike. Pandora <http://www.pandora.com/> uses an algorithm 
that essentially modernized the much beloved free-form radio formats of 
the 1960s and '70s.

But Pandora has come to see its dominant market share 
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/30/us-pandoramedia-shares-idUSBRE87T0TX20120830> 
not as an against-all-odds triumph, but as a burden. The more successful 
it became, the more money it paid musicians in royalties. Lowering its 
rate, the company has argued, would make it easier for Internet radio 
companies to thrive, theoretically providing more ways for artists to 
get compensated. Last week, Pandora CEO Joe Kennedy appeared at a 
hearing 
<http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/Hearings%202012/hear_11282012.html> 
on Capitol Hill in support of the Internet Radio Fairness Act, or IFRA, 
which would lower the amount of royalties that Pandora and other 
Internet radio services pay to artists. The industry has estimated the 
act would allow Pandora to reduce payments to artists by as much as 85 
percent.

The company has been spending big to make its case in Washington. 
Pandora dished out 
<http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000055195> $180,000 on 
lobbying in 2011 and $160,000 in 2012, according to the Center For 
Responsive Politics. For much of its lobbying this year 
<http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000055195&year=2012>, the 
company retained TwinLogic Strategies, whose other clients 
<http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=D000063803&year=2012> 
include Amazon, Chevron, Motorola and Yahoo.

During the past election cycle, Westergren donated more than $65,000 
<http://www.opensecrets.org/usearch/index.php?q=Tim+Westergren&searchButt_clean.x=0&searchButt_clean.y=0&cx=010677907462955562473%3Anlldkv0jvam&cof=FORID%3A11> 
to candidates, a PAC and state Democratic Party organizations, including 
$2,000 to Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who introduced the Internet 
Radio Fairness Act. Westergren also has given thousands of dollars in 
campaign contributions to members of the House Judiciary Committee, 
which could help steer legislation friendly to Pandora.

But all of Pandora's lobbying in support for the bill has antagonized 
musicians, and lawmakers. If it's not careful, industry insiders said, 
Pandora could end up jeopardizing their business.

"Pandora has to be applauded for doing such great work to grow the 
webcasting marketplace," said Casey Rae, deputy director of theFuture of 
Music Coalition <http://futureofmusic.org/>. "Over the years it's been 
pretty clear there's been major benefits to musicians. ... When you are 
looking at IRFA and the potential effects -- the sheen starts to come 
off a bit."

The bill has attracted a We-Are-The-World collection of foes, with 
musicians, unions and industry executives joining forces. More than 100 
artists and musicians across all major genres -- including big-name 
stars 
<http://www.spin.com/articles/rihanna-brian-wilson-everyone-suddenly-mad-at-pandora> 
like Katy Perry, Rihanna and Cee Lo Green -- signed an open letter 
<http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/posts/la-et-ms-pandora-congress-irfa-musicians-letter-protest-20121114,0,775927.story> 
in Billboard magazine in November opposing Pandora and the Internet 
Radio Fairness Act. The NAACP 
<http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/267053-naacp-blasts-pandora-backed-internet-royalty-bill-> 
has also attacked the bill. Pandora's push seems to have stripped the 
company of a lot of the goodwill it had built within the industry and 
put the spotlight on its balance sheets. Musicians argue that Pandora 
already pays them a pittance.

"When you do the math, it's horrifying for an artist," Eric Hilton, who 
runs ESL Music <http://www.eslmusic.com/#%21/about> and is one half of 
the band Thievery Corporation, told The Huffington Post in an email.

Laura Ballance 
<http://survivingthegoldenage.com/interview-laura-ballance-of-superchunk/>, 
co-founder of one of the most successful indie labels, Merge Records 
<http://www.mergerecords.com/>, whose roster includes bands such as 
Arcade Fire, the Magnetic Fields and Spoon, said she isn't happy with 
Pandora's current rate either. "It should be higher," she told HuffPost. 
"It doesn't make me feel badly for [Pandora] at all that they should be 
paying out half of their revenue or more to artists -- that is entirely 
how their revenue is generated."

At the hearing last week before the House Subcommittee on Intellectual 
Property, Competition and the Internet, Jimmy Jam, the famed R&B 
producer and songwriter, calculated that for every spin of a song on 
Pandora, the copyright holders and musicians get just one-tenth of one cent.

"Put another way, the listener would have to hear that song on Pandora 
every single day for nearly two years to equal the payments" from one 
digital purchase on Amazon, Jimmy Jam said. He noted that for each 
99-cent download on Amazon, the company pays about 70 cents to rights 
holders and creators.

Lawmakers on the committee questioned whether royalty rates were the 
real problem, pointing out that traditional FM/AM stations pay no 
royalties to performers at all. Rather than lowering the rates that 
Pandora pays, some congressmen proposed that getting terrestrial radio 
stations to pay up could be part of a fairer, more comprehensive 
solution. Others suggested that Pandora might need to fix its business 
model and perhaps sell more ads.

"We need to find a solution that brings together all stakeholders and 
ensures that we are not back here in another year adjusting the rates 
again and inserting ourselves into the market," Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner 
(R-Wis.) said in an e-mail statement to HuffPost after the hearing.

But Kennedy, Pandora's CEO, maintained that the solution is to lower the 
rates his company pays to artists, telling HuffPost that the company is 
not interested in lobbying radio to start paying royalties. "We don't 
have a dog in that fight," he said. "We think it's important that 
Internet radio not be held hostage to that issue."

Pandora's legislative push has exposed the company as far short of the 
transformational force it has hoped to be. It may have a musician as a 
founder, but it's still a publicly traded company with shareholders to 
please. The company, critics said, seems less inclined to revolutionize 
the music business than to enhance its stock price.

"These are all investment bankers," said Danny Goldberg 
<http://goldve.com/#tabs-about>, a veteran manager and former label 
executive with Warner and Atlantic. He said Pandora is no different than 
industry's heavyweights. "They are all cut from the same cloth, which is 
fight for any penny. ... I don't know where the self-righteousness comes 
from."

"Maybe Pandora's business doesn't work," Goldberg said. "That's okay. 
There's no inherent moral right to have a business plan work."

If Pandora's business model 
<http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3AP&ei=j3y-UJizFq2v0AHhbA> is 
going to work, it needs musicians and record labels to buy in and supply 
it with content. Having a deep catalog of music is essential for any 
digital music startup looking to attract users (and venture capital 
funding). A lower royalty rate could mean a smaller catalog. "I think 
that some artists and musicians would indeed pull out of the company if 
Pandora manages to get the rate lowered," Ballance said.

If Pandora's users start finding that their favorite bands aren't 
available through the radio service, they may migrate elsewhere.

At least for now, the vast majority of artists do not have the rights to 
pull their songs from Pandora. But as they sour on the Internet radio 
service, they are starting to search for alternatives. Damon Krukowski, 
a member of indie icons Galaxie 500 and Damon & Naomi, began streaming 
his music for free at his own site <http://galaxie500.bandcamp.com/> 
partly in response to what he considered to be Pandora's and fellow 
Internet music service Spotify's paltry royalties. He detailed his 
decision in a Pitchfork essay 
<http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/8993-the-cloud/>, which became 
something of a sensation.

"The reaction [to the essay] has been a surprise to me, just in that 
there was so much of it," Krukowski told HuffPost. "I didn't break any 
news -- those royalty rates have been discussed before. ... I'm always 
glad to share information and ideas with other musicians. In my 
experience, we depend on one another for that kind of help. Who else can 
we ask about that kind of thing, other than one another?"

All the uncertainty in the digital realm reminded Krukowski of being a 
young indie rocker in the 1980s, when putting out an album and 
organizing a tour required a pioneering spirit. "There's no normal 
again," he explained. "I don't think anybody has an answer. I don't 
think it's necessarily a bad thing. It might just get very creative."

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121205/d96501d4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t