this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
460 points (77.5% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54716 readers
679 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

whatever will the millionaires do????

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] barttier@feddit.de 63 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Imagine feeling good because you pay for spotify. If you want your favorite artists to have money buy tickets and merch.

[–] 3laws@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] barttier@feddit.de 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also Eventim if you are in germany - good luck

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Better than no money at all tbh.

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nah. My band's releases that I have the rights to are not on Spotify on purpose. I'm not going to give you free use of my art so you can pay myself and my bandmates almost enough to get a sandwich every quarter.

Fuck right off with that insulting shit.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

That’s your right, but by not being on Spotify you’re likely worse off. I’ve discovered many bands on Spotify that I’ve then seen live and bought merch that I’d never have heard of otherwise. It’s one of the rare times where being paid in exposure actually works.

[–] LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And? That company beside the point.

That's the correct decision for you. Then majorities like the income and sign up. They probably want their money.

[–] emptiestplace@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think art has value and artists deserve to eat as well as anybody else, but ... this spontaneous escalation thing you're doing has you coming across as a real cunt. It doesn't seem like it was accidental, but in the unlikely event that it was and this actually isn't your thing, I figured you might want to know.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago

You've really read too much in their reply

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unless they have a 360 deal, which most new artists are forced into.

How does one actually ensure the artist gets the majority of sales, when the labels now take a cut even of merch at live shows? :(

Can artists set up a direct donation page? I'd rather use that if possible.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

…a 360 deal

I’ve not heard of this, could you explain what it is?

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/360_deal

It's a music deal that lets the labels take a cut of everything, including revenue streams artists used to have to themselves -- shows, sponsorship deals, merchandising.

It used to be that if you bought, for example, a concert t-shirt or stickers or whatever (unsure if CDs/tapes were ever exempt) at the live performance that the artist got all or most of that. Artists could also control their own merchandising and aspects of their persona outside of the studio... personal appearances etc. but now the record labels 'own' them more completely. A terrible turn in general, and most labels demand a '360 deal or nothing' to new artists.

"Merch" used to be the way artists made a lot of their income while on tour, since they didn't make nearly as much from their album sales from an already unfair record-deal system; now they can't even catch a fair break on tour.

Huge acts can negotiate better deals; the rest are stuck with unfair terms.

[–] Techmaster@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also some labels would do a deal where if you buy an album through the usual retailers, the label takes a cut. But, they sell the albums to the artist at cost, and they can then sell them for full profit. So if you buy a CD through the artist's web site, they make a lot more than if you buy it through a retailer.

Considering Vinyl actually has a higher market share than CDs, I’m guessing the same rules would apply?

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I saw Sleep Token. Their merch line lasted a lot longer than the show did. They were slinging $60 posters. Average purchase was probably $200.

They probably banked over 100k at the merch table that evening.

[–] small44@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

My main genre i listen to is hip hop and there is almost no good merch to buy. I live in canada and listen to many underground artists who doesn't come to canada to perform. I think buying digital or physical music is the best option

[–] HotChocoBum@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I pay for Spotify because I enjoy the recommendation and playlist system. Looking at how the revenue is distributed to the artist, paying for Spotify is equivalent to piracy

[–] Zekas@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Hasn't Spotify been taking away features now too? I find it so fucking bizarre that people pay to get less.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone -4 points 1 year ago

You should still support services that you use though. Pirate music if you want, but if you use Spotify you should pay for it.