The mother stands by the bed and entices me over. I follow and, as a horse neighs loudly at the ceiling, lay my head on the young man’s chest, which trembles under my wet beard. That confirms what I know: the young man is healthy. His circulation is a little off, saturated with coffee by his caring mother, but he’s healthy and best pushed out of bed with a shove. I’m no improver of the world and let him lie there. I am employed by the district and do my duty to the full, right to the point where it’s almost too much. Badly paid, but I’m generous and ready to help the poor. I still have to look after Rosa, and then the young man may have his way, and I want to die too. What am I doing here in this endless winter! My horse is dead, and there is no one in the village who’ll lend me his. I have to drag my team out of the pig sty. If they hadn’t happened to be horses, I’d have had to travel with pigs. That’s the way it is. And I nod to the family. They know nothing about it, and if they did know, they wouldn’t believe it. Incidentally, it’s easy to write prescriptions, but difficult to come to an understanding with people. Now, at this point my visit might have come to an end—they have once more called for my help unnecessarily. I’m used to that. With the help of my night bell the entire region torments me, but that this time I had to sacrifice Rosa as well, this beautiful girl, who lives in my house all year long and whom I scarcely notice—this sacrifice is too great, and I must somehow in my own head subtly rationalize it away for the moment, in order not to let loose at this family who cannot, even with their best will, give me Rosa back again. But as I am closing up by hand bag and calling for my fur coat, the family is standing together, the father sniffing the glass of rum in his hand, the mother, probably disappointed in me—what more do these people expect?—tearfully biting her lips, and the sister flapping a very bloody hand towel, I am somehow ready, in the circumstances, to concede that the young man is perhaps nonetheless sick. I go to him. He smiles up at me, as if I was bringing him the most nourishing kind of soup—ah, now both horses are whinnying, the noise is probably supposed to come from higher regions in order to illuminate my examination—and now I find out that, yes indeed, the young man is ill. On his right side, in the region of the hip, a wound the size of the palm of one’s hand has opened up. Rose coloured, in many different shadings, dark in the depths, brighter on the edges, delicately grained, with uneven patches of blood, open to the light like a mine. That’s what it looks like from a distance. Close up a complication is apparent. Who can look at that without whistling softly? Worms, as thick and long as my little finger, themselves rose coloured and also spattered with blood, are wriggling their white bodies with many limbs from their stronghold in the inner of the wound towards the light. Poor young man, there’s no helping you.
THE MOST BEAUTIFUL GIRL IN TOW
She had a habit of being kind to the uglier ones; the so-called
handsome men revolted her- “No guts,” she said, “no zap. They are riding on
their perfect little earlobes and well- shaped nostrils…all surface and no
insides…” She had a temper that came close to insanity, she had a temper that some
call insanity. Her father had died of alcohol and her mother had run off leaving the
girls alone. The girls went to a relative who placed them in a convent. The convent had
been an unhappy place, more for Cass than the sisters…
Trust that little voice in your head that says ‘Wouldn’t it be interesting if…’; And then do it.
If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”
I. Brief history of streaming services II. The 1971 act and Legacy artists
A. Legacy artists and fact of 15 February 1972
B. Sound recording amendment of 1971
III. Increased losses of music streaming services Conclusion
In this piece of work, I have raised the issue of the impact of streaming music services to Musicians income. How did music streaming services has become the part of our life so immediately? I would Not only focus on Streaming services has created new areas and opportunities for artists to increase their income and also why has it split artists over onto two different ideas whether it is an upside for artists or downside. To specifically identify the reasons of the artists who are outspoken about the benefits and drawbacks of streaming services, We should have a look at the beginning of the streaming services when royalty payment did not eve exist from the music streaming services. As we all agree, Napster has influenced to present music streaming services and has led to reaching the point where we are now. The closure of Napster which has played a huge role in the world of streaming was an unfortunate. What was more unfortunate for Napster what it caused it to end up being shut down because of the lawsuits filed against it.
As could we consider from this situation is how important is the royalty payments for the artists, as so they have filed lawsuits against The Napster even with taking the risk of losing their fans. Closure of Napster has allowed another streaming services to develop the concept of streaming services onto subscription fee system to satisfy the both sides of which could benefit from the service without having the problems same as Napster’s had in the past. It is also essential to the point that after the existence of MusicNet with its subscription fee concept, The artists have had another reason to complain about the service, low royalty payments. MusicNet had shared the same faith with Napster. However, this was not the end
of the music streaming world. What the artists only demand is that to get a higher royalty payment from streaming whereas the consumers are willing to pay fewer subscription fees. Another issue that I am going to point out is that the legacy artist who could not even raise their voice about all of the conflicts it has been mentioned. To start with, I believe that, The 1971 act is one of the most unjust law in the music history. I do not believe that there is anyone who could disagree with me. Even re-recorded song from pre-1971 could get royalty payments, whereas the actual owners of that songs could not. Of course, we should look at who would be affected negatively if the law is reformed. No one but streaming services.
Today, Spotify is one of the biggest streaming service in the music world. It has 40 million paying subscribers from all over the world. I would also be discussing that is it enough to have such a huge number of paying users to make a profit and also make enough payments to all artists including legacy artists? Finally, In the combination of how we introduced the streaming services, who could benefit from and who could not because of The 1971 act and how could music streaming services survive under this conditions, it is necessary to provide some information about the streaming services.
I. BRIEF HISTORY OF STREAMING SERVICES
It was not till when Napster launched that we could have imagined the streaming music will become the fastest-increasing business in the music history.Napster was found in 1999 By Sean Parker, Shawn Fanning, and John Fanning in purpose to enable all the users to share their files with the other users emphasized sharing songs converted to MP3 format. Peer-to-peer music sharing has become much easier after Napster was found. Moreover, Napster has introduced a new perspective of sharing free MP3s into the mainstream.According to co-founder Fanning Napster’s actual goal was that 1″To build communities around the different type of music” As we can consider sharing music for free was not something that record companies was ready for, and they have no interest in legitimizing the streaming service. Due to the effect of the unprofitable concept of sharing music has split over artists regarding whether or not to affirm the idea of music streaming. 2″I don’t see sense in fighting something that is the future. I don’t feel that I’m in the position to say I’m being ripped off by Napster in any way,” these words belongs to the vocalist of Dave Matthews Band who is also a huge supporter of Napster. Famous rapper Chuck D, from Public Enemy, is another outspoken Napster defender artist. When was he asked what does he think about free of charge copy and share songs?
3 “I rarely listen to pop radio stations or watch MTV, but because Napster’s software allows you to view the MP3 music files of all the other Napster users, I’ve been able to find music in like-minded listeners’ collections I would otherwise not have been aware of. And I have recently bought CD’s by Macy Gray, Holly Cole and Alanis Morissette after discovering them through Napster.”
Expectedly, many performers and artists thoughts were decidedly opposite. For instance, Lars Ulrich from Metallica had shown his opinions about Napster by taking them to court. There is no doubt that this was one of its kind and unforgettable moments for the music history. They have taken all their chance to show their fans, which side they are standing of this situation. Napster’s sharing a Metallica’s incomplete song 3″ I Disappear ” which has not been published. This was the last straw for the Napster.
The downfall of the Napster was about to start as well as loss of fans for Metallica. Nevertheless, In April 2000, Metallica took action by filing a lawsuit against Napster under the charge of unlawful misfeasance of copyrights infringement. The lawsuit has resulted in an injunction against Napster.
Napster had been asked to refurbish the site by placing a filter in three days or would be wind up. Napster’s unluckiness has not stopped at this point. After a month Dr.dre and some of his colleagues including RIAA filed another lawsuit against Napster. In conclusion, Napster has managed to have a settlement with the Metallica and other plaintiffs. The settlements included that Napster will deactivate the songs being shared from any musicians who has no willing their songs to be shared. According to director of Napster Alex Winter, Fanning’s future business model was to do licensing deals with the record industry and become a legitimate music service. However, the settlements could not last longer, and the company went bankrupt because of having difficulties of purchasing the rights to Napster’s before they achieve their future business model. Undoubtedly, Napster has played a huge role in the future of music industry. It has created a new area of music business for creators and consumers. In addition to that, we could explicitly say that Napster has inspired most of the current music streaming services. MusicNet is the first music streaming service which took immediate action after the Napster collapsed. The phase of acquainting with subscription fee has started with MusicNet.
Presently, we could count several prominent websites which sell millions of music to millions of people by using implementation of subscription fee.For instance, Apple Music, Spotify, Tidal, Deezer, Amazon Music just a few of them which are so popular recently. The reason why MusicNet takes no part in this list is that because of unsatisfied royalty payments. It has been hampered by limitations and artists requests of high prices resulted in the closure of MusicNet. MusicNet closure was mainly because of unhappy artists about low pricing of royalty payments. The artists who could even have alternative ways to make money such as touring and concerts, allow us to focus on and listen to complaints of the people who are not even able to benefit from royalty payments.
II. THE 1971 ACT and LEGACY ARTISTS
A.The copyright law before 1971 copyright act was the 1909 copyright act.
1909 copyright law’s subject stated that “all the writings of an author.” it did not consider the sound recording as writings in the first quarter of 19th century. However, contributions of performers increased to the level of writings. This opinion is based on the courts which also states 1909 act was essential as well.
The 1971 law amendment apply and considered sound recordings as writings and to ensure that the song had full protection. The question we should rise is that does it protect everyone?
B.It is known when we listen to a song on the music streaming services; we are automatically sending royalties to its songwriters and singers. However, If the song has recorded before 15 February 1972, copyright holders of that song gets no royalty payment whatsoever. The reason is that sound recordings had become eligible for copyright protection and provided royalty payments for songwriters and singers in 1971. Johnny Cash’s daughter Rosanne Cash is who mentions this problem every interview she attends. Rosanne Cash did not start recording her songs until 1978, and she receives royalty payments. However, her father Johnny Cash who created many of his classics, such as “I walk the line” or “Ring of Fire” is not suitable to get royalties. Rosanne Cash says:
“These legacy artists that built American
Music are not being paid. They are all aging, if they are still alive. Some are sick They can not make up for the lack of royalty income by touring.its a serious problem.”
I personally agree with the assertion that legacy artists are not physically able to earn money by touring or concerts. In addition to that, I believe that even if they were able to do touring, it is still their right to get royalty payments same as the artists who gets royalties by re-recording pre-1971 songs. There is no doubt that the law immediately has to be re-fixed with more relevant to everyone including consumers and all the creators of the songs. However, we should also discuss how would that affect the streaming services, when they are already troubled with royalty payments.
III. INCREASED LOSSES OF SPOTIFY
Spotify’s income and users have risen to twice as much as 2015.
It is astounding that what we see from Spotify’s published financial results in 2015. Apple music and Spotify had involved in cutthroat competition in 2015. However, Spotify’s incomes have increased up 80%, and the numbers of users nearly have risen to 50%. With the help of this numbers, Spotify has become most successful music streaming service in 2015. However, Even this brighter chart did still not hinder to Spotify keep making losses in fact of financial. In 2015, Spotify’s total income increased to 1.9 billion Euro from 1 billion euros with 80%
increment. At the end of 2015, they have managed to have 89 million users from all over the world. While residual numbers of active users up to 48%, the number of paying subscribers has also increased over to 30 million. The company received 10% from ads and 90% from the paid subscribers. However, Even this results could not help Spotify make the profit. Beside it resulted in making higher losses for the company. In 2013, the financial loss was 58 million Euro. However, In 2015, they have finished the year with 173 million Euro financial loss.
Spotify has paid 84% of their income to copyrights owners. Streaming service that allows us to access over 30 million tracks has changed the premium packages. It regarding, it is a very critical move for Spotify fortune to go price cutting in purpose recover the financial loss. Three months package is £9.99 whereas the family package is £14,99. Involving in competition with Apple Music, Deezer, and Beats Music would undoubtedly end up the outcome of lower prices for the consumers.
According to my opinion, being able to access music from the devices in our home was the future of the music industry. In fact, I could not conveniently say that I was a huge supporter of Napster. However, I am also aware of that Napster has played a huge role where we have reached in the music streaming. While it is considered as piracy, I think we should be grateful to that it had led the artists to sell their records online. I have explored the factor unsatisfied artists because of low royalty payments. These considerations lead me to mention that even the artist who could earn money from touring, concerts or newly recorded songs can complain about low royalty payments, legacy artists who are not eligible to earn money from any of these ways have rights to rise their voices regarding not getting royalty payment at all. I think, it is their right and it has to be delivered as soon as possible. I have also explored that if the legacy artists rights had delivered, would music streaming services have manage to pay them.
From all reasons that I have shared about the income and expense of one of biggest music streaming service, I strongly believe that they would not be able to satisfy the all the sides which are legacy artists, artists, and the subscribers. On the other hand, it is an undeniable fact is that the 1971 act is unjust and it needs to be reformed to justice to be served. In closing, as far as I know from humankind, struggle nature’s way of strengthening us. I believe that music streaming services would come up with a better idea that appeals to everyone.
Federal Copyright Protection (2011) Available at: http://www.copyright.gov/docs/sound/pre-72-report.pdf (Accessed: 25 November 2016)
Bokich, B. (2000) The musical times, they are a-changin’. Available at:
(Accessed: 25 November 2016).
BBC (2002) Napster files for bankruptcy. Available at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2023201.stm (Accessed: 25 November 2016).
WIKI (2016) ‘Napster’, in Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster (Accessed: 25 November 2016)
Titcomb, J. (2016) Spotify’s revenue hits €2bn, but when will it make money? Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/05/24/spotifys-revenue-hits-2bn-but-when-will-it-make-mo ney/ (Accessed: 25 November 2016)
BBC (2016) Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36365927 (Accessed: 25 November 2016).
AB, S. (2016) Go premium. Be happy. Available at:
cstutz and Peoples, G. (2014) SoundExchange launches campaign for royalties on Pre-1972 recordings. Available at:
http://www.wnyc.org/story/rosanne-cash-older-musicians-would-like-some-royalties-too/ (Accessed: 25November 2016).
FindLaw (2001) Available at: http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/napster/napster-md030601ord.pdf
(Accessed: 25 November 2016)
AB, S. (2016) Go premium. Be happy. Available at:
paid&utm_term=43700014444708413_c (Accessed: 25 November 2016).
cstutz and Peoples, G. (2014) SoundExchange launches campaign for royalties on Pre-1972 recordings. Available at:
campaign-for-royalties-on-pre (Accessed: 25 November 2016).WNYC (2014)
Older musicians would like some royalties, too. Available at: http://www.wnyc.org/story/rosanne-cash-older-musicians-would-like-some-royalties-too/ (Accessed: 25 November 2016).