music – AEPO-ARTIS

Athens looks at music in the digital age

admin — Thu, 30 Oct 2025 00:00:39 +0000

From 22 to 24 October, AEPO-ARTIS member Apollon and FIM organised ‘Music in the digital age’, a three-day conference that brought together more than 150 representatives to discuss music’s most pressing topics: streaming and AI. Filled with musical intervention and most interesting discussions, Apollon and FIM set a new standard for the future of conferencing.

The focus during the first day was put on streaming and the fact that a decade after it became the biggest source of revenue for the music industry, the turnaround is still not felt by musicians in the same way, particularly when it concerns their capacity as performer.

After providing a full overview of how 25 years of digitisation has changed the music industry Dinnos Giorgountzos (Apollon) entered into discussion with Xenia Manning (Spotify), David Martin (FAC), Lauri Rechardt (IFPI), Manos Dedevesis (Stay Independent) and our own Ioan Kaes. The debate focused on the purely exclusive right as the cause of the lack of proper remuneration for musicians and the total lack of any compensation for non-featured musicians.

The opportunity was also used to clarify that the remuneration right that AEPO-ARTIS has been fighting for for years is in the first place a tool to achieve an objective and that performers are open to any alternative model that pursues the same objective. However, any model claiming to be artist centric should put that same artist at the centre of the remuneration and not just the centre of attention.

The afternoon panel, moderated by Christophe Van Vaerenbergh (PlayRight) brought together the worlds of performers CMOs, Unions, government representatives and academics to discuss possible solutions. Especially the passion with which Marcos Alves de Souza of the Brazilian Ministry of Culture defended the concept of a remuneration right and the need to make it an international standard was particularly motivating.

Day two revolved completely around how AI is manifesting itself. Via in-depth technical analysis and hands-on presentations, participants received a much-needed insight into what Artificial Intelligence is and how this new technology is making its way into every aspect of our (musical) existence.

Day three then sought confrontation again. In two separate panels, the industry and the creators were asked for their perspectives. AI developers (Microsoft), streaming platforms (DiMA), and research institutions (IRCAM) emphasised their respect for the music industry and the care with which they develop and use AI to support our sector. This narrative turned out to not correspond with that of Patricia Riera Barsallo (AISGE), Marc du Moulin (ECSA), Chris Castle, and Giorgos Andreou. They debunked a few myths and exposed the flawed legal framework and the ongoing infringement of copyright and related rights by an industry that is at the same time competing with our performers.

The conference concluded with an extensive panel, chaired by Yiannis Maragoudakis (Apollon), listing all possible solutions. Our own Xavier Blanc and Pal Tomori were joined by Roberto Mello (ABRAMUS), Marcos de Souza (Brazil), and Ben Kessler (AFM). Here too, it became clear that any scenario that envisions a fair balance and fair remuneration for performers cannot avoid legislative intervention. This requires consideration of the differences between how music is handled on the input and output sides. Both require a tailored approach.

AEPO-ARTIS would like to thank the whole Apollon team for the enormous effort put into the organisation. With more than 150 in-person attendants and a thousand online participants, this will without a doubt be remembered as the biggest conference of 2025.

The post Athens looks at music in the digital age first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Streams and Dreams 2 shows the ineffectiveness of the DSM Directive

AEPO-ARTIS — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 13:42:25 +0000

A new report entitled Streams & Dreams Part 2 – The Impact of the DSM Directive on EU Artists and Musicians, written by the independent music business researcher Daniel Johansson (Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences) and published on June 13^th, proves the ineffectiveness of the DSM Directive.

Based upon a survey of 9.542 artists from 19 EU countries, conducted by AEPO-ARTIS and its members in collaboration with IAO, this is one of the most substantiated reports ever done on issues related to performers in the music industry. The report is available here.

The report focusses on the provisions in Chapter 3 (“Fair remuneration in exploitation contracts of authors and performers”) of the directive, which oblige Member States to guarantee artists effective rights: to receive appropriate and proportionate remuneration, to receive transparent information on all exploitations of their recordings, to claim additional remuneration and recover rights from record labels in certain situations, and to request alternative dispute resolution.

It came as no surprise to AEPO-ARTIS that the DSM directive has had almost no positive impact on EU performers:

Appropriate and proportionate remuneration: only 5.1% of signed artists considered their streaming revenue to be satisfactory.
Transparency: 77.6% of musicians still do not receive the transparent information from labels that they are legally entitled to receive, despite article 19 obliging record labels to produce this information proactively.

Contract adjustment: only 35 out of 4.215 signed artists managed to adjust their contractual terms and receive additional remuneration.
Rights revocation: less than 2% of artists benefitted from the provisions on rights recovery, contained in article 22.
Alternative dispute resolution: The possibility of alternative dispute resolution (designed to avoid costly litigation and minimise hostility between those in dispute) has barely been used and when it was, a majority of artists (60%) did not find it helpful.

The author reaches the conclusion that: “This report has primarily demonstrated that, although Articles 18-22 were designed and implemented in national legislation to strengthen the position of artists and musicians in the market, gaps in the effectiveness of the legislation still remain. Consequently, this report suggests that additional measures are required by the EU, its Member States, and the music industry.”

Unlike their approach to article 17, the European Commission has failed to give any official guidance on how to implement chapter three. It appears that they have been relying on the belief that a literal transposition of Chapter three would address the problem identified by the directive, i.e. the weak position of performers (and authors) and that the goal of fair remuneration would be achieved. Moreover, by starting an infringement procedure against more than 20 Member States, they have pushed many towards a literal transposition.

Overwhelming evidence now shows that this believe is naïve and it would be a dereliction of duty for the Commission to continue to rely on it. They now have a responsibility towards performers to intervene in a meaningful way.

But Members States are not let of scot-free either.

Now that the French government has evidence that the satisfaction of French artists with streaming revenue (2.94%) is lower than the EU average (5.1%), are they willing to wait for the Commission to take action? Is the Irish government willing to ignore the fact that not a single Irish artist expressed satisfaction with their streaming revenue? Does the Portuguese government consider it relevant that more than 1.000 of their artists felt strongly enough to freely give their time to complete a survey? When 95.44% of their artists consider the way streaming revenue is shared to be unfair, does the Portuguese government believe it is acceptable to remain inactive?

The author of the report describes one specific situation in which the intervention of the Commission is “imperative”. With regard to session musicians, who receive no remuneration for streaming, he stated that:

“As session musicians do not possess a remuneration right for streaming, it is imperative to provide EU-level recommendations on whether Member States should introduce such a remuneration right.”

For too long, artists have endured stakeholder dialogues, consultations and ultimately a lack of willingness on the part of the Commission to take decisive action. The question of a remuneration right for session musicians could hardly be more straightforward. The Commission is fully aware that session musicians receive no remuneration at all from streaming. They are fully aware that there is no legal impediment to such a right. They are now aware that five years after the adoption of the DSM Directive 87.6% of artists consider the way streaming revenue is shared is not fair. It is now purely a matter of political will.

When mechanisms that rely on the responsibility of the industry to achieve a policy goal fail, focus needs to be put on mechanisms that allow policy makers to take responsibility. And those can be found in article 18 of the directive. It is well known that several Member States have introduced additional remuneration mechanisms that have an effect that goes beyond the contracts that performers sign and benefit the artistic community as a whole.

It is clear that an effective implementation of article 18 is essential if performers are to see meaningful change. A report fed by the voices of 9.542 performers makes this an irrefutable fact. It is up to the Commission now to take this fact serious and push its Members States towards an effective implementation. It is up to the Member States to not wait for that push to become shove.

The post Streams and Dreams 2 shows the ineffectiveness of the DSM Directive first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

AEPO-ARTIS attends WIPO 45th SCCR

AEPO-ARTIS — Thu, 25 Apr 2024 05:17:17 +0000

From 15th to 19th April, Geneva was the setting for WIPO’s 45th Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights. AEPO-ARTIS was present with a small delegation, spoke with multiple country delegates, met with the African group, the GRULAC and the European Union and had its hand in two events that aimed at putting performers and their right to remuneration back on WIPO’s radar.

On 17 April, in conjunction with FILAIE, FIM and SCAPR, AEPO-ARTIS co-organised “Music Streaming – How to Fix an Unfair Business Model”. The panel presented a number of problems with the music streaming industry together with a proposed solution based on the AEPO-ARTIS recommendation to introduce a right to equitable remuneration, subject to collective management.

Two musicians – Julie Freundt (a featured artist from Peru) and Jepa Lambert (a non-featured artist from Finland) explained the difficulties they face pursuing their chosen career, highlighting the low levels of remuneration despite being successful in their respective areas.

The discussions focussed on the remuneration of actors and in particular the practices that exist in Belgium, Slovenia and Ecuador, all of which have in place a statutory remuneration right applicable to audiovisual streaming. The participants were extremely well-informed and clearly explained the benefits of collective management, not just to performers, but also to certain producers.

On 18 April AEPO-ARTIS hosted a second panel to discuss the fair remuneration of actors in the digital environment. The panel, moderated by Ioan Kaes, featured the Belgian actor Gilles De Schryver, the Slovenian actress Nika Rozman and Federico Duret, Executive Director of UNIARTE, the Ecuadorian collective management organisation for actors.

The threat of AI to the actors’ community was also addressed. A recorded message from the French dubbing artist Marjorie Frantz highlighted that the voices of deceased actors can even be used, without the family’s consent, thus illustrating that the threats of AI are not only economic, but are personal too.

The efforts have paid off. The proposal introduced by Ivory Coast in November 2023, requesting WIPO to conduct a study on the remuneration of authors in the audiovisual sector, received full support from all countries. But, more importantly, our request to extend this study to include the remuneration of performers was accepted unanimously as well.

Less progress can be reported for what concerns the GRULAC proposal to make the topic of ‘Copyright in the digital environment’ an official standing item on the agenda. While GRULAC had prepared – upon the request of several delegations – a detailed workplan, many continued to hide behind the same old argument: “too little time”. The US, on the other hand, remain completely opposed to any further discussion of the topic. They believe that performers hold all necessary rights as a consequence of the WPPT and that any discussion about fair remuneration is a discussion between two contracting parties.

The lack of time was apparently not an argument against AI. On Thursday, most of the agenda was occupied by a long information session on the Opportunities and Challenges Raised by Generative AI. Despite interesting interventions, this session raised little that had not already been covered in other WIPO meetings. Nonetheless, a large majority of delegations supported the proposal to provide a follow-up session during the next SCCR.

On Friday multiple organisations denounced the lack of progress and will to work on a framework that makes the WIPO treaties workable for digital exploitation. AEPO-ARTIS pronounced its full support for the GRULAC proposal stating that: “Signing and ratifying treaties does not make fair remuneration for performers in the digital environment a fait accompli.

You can read the full statement via this link.

At the closing of the Committee, it was decided that the GRULAC proposal will be discussed further at SCCR/46 which will take place in 2025. AEPO-ARTIS will continue to convince WIPO and its member states to see it as their responsibility to make sure that the WPPT and the Beijing Treaty have the effect for which they were drafted, the remuneration of our performers.

To be continued.

The post AEPO-ARTIS attends WIPO 45th SCCR first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Report on “Cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market” adopted

AEPO-ARTIS — Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:49:28 +0000

On 17 January, the European Parliament plenary adopted the report of MEP Ibán García del Blanco on “Cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market”.

While the title of the report refers only to authors, it is to be welcomed that, during the amendment stage of the legislative procedure, the European Parliament made the decision to refer throughout the text to both authors and performers.

The content of the report points out where the streaming market has gone very badly wrong. Key elements that it contains include comments such as:

“Never before has music’s financial ‘pie’ been so large. This situation is in itself paradoxical, however: never before has the situation of creators and performers been so insecure.”

“…the current imbalance in revenue allocation in the music streaming market disfavours both authors and performers and puts the sustainability of their professional careers in the digital market at risk; welcomes any efforts towards fairer remuneration for authors and performers, in recognition of the importance of their role in the European music sector.”

While the report exposes the right irregularities, the question remains what the impact of the report will be. It states that: “It is vital to carry out a thorough analysis of the music sector’s value chain in order to identify the imbalances and put in place corrective measures through legal tools and/or codes of good practice.”

However, with the CDSM Directive having been introduced relatively recently, it is extremely unlikely that there will be another legislative initiative any time soon that would introduce the necessary “legal tools” referred to in the report. “Codes of good practice” could be introduced more quickly but would still involve lengthy negotiation, perhaps with limited success.

Nonetheless, the signal sent towards the Commission cannot be denied. The Commission is legally obliged to carry out a monitoring procedure to ensure an effective implementation of the CDSM Directive. It will have to take into account the problems highlighted in the report and ensure that national implementation of the directive addresses these wherever possible.

In particular, the Commission should note that the report: “Calls on the Commission to assess the impact of existing contractual practices in the European music streaming market, as well as of the current revenue distribution model for music streaming services, on cultural diversity and the principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration for authors and performers, and calls on it to explore, in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders, appropriate measures, including alternative and fairer models to reallocate streaming revenues;…”

For performers, this extremely supportive report is a step in the right direction, but the destination remains far away. Much remains in the hands of the Commission and their willingness to dedicate resources to support creators and implement the recommendations in the report.

AEPO-ARTIS will maintain pressure on the Commission to ensure that the excellent work carried out by Ibán García del Blanco and his colleagues will not have been in vain.

The post Report on “Cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market” adopted first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

AEPO-ARTIS writes an open letter to the Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo

AEPO-ARTIS — Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:15:09 +0000

With start of the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the European Union, AEPO-ARTIS has addressed an open letter to the Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo with the aim of emphasizing the importance of culture and promoting the improvement of performers’ rights, in accordance with the priorities during this presidency involving cultural and creative sectors.

Dear Prime Minister of Belgium,

Dear Mr. De Croo,

Last week Belgium officially took over the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. And so, for the next six months you will be leading the rest of the European Union in taking the most important decisions that need to be taken.

AEPO-ARTIS and the large community of performers we represent would like to thank you for giving culture, and the artist in particular, an important place in the objectives of your Presidency.

AEPO-ARTIS is a non-profit making organisation that represents 39 European performers’ collective management organisations from 29 different countries, including the Belgian organisation PlayRight. The number of performers, from the audio and audiovisual sector, represented by our members is estimated at more than 650.000.

When we look at the programme for the upcoming Presidency, we are pleased to read that the Belgian Presidency will “stimulate the digital transformation of the cultural and creative sectors” and “shed a light on the working conditions of artists and creative professionals”. It is important that the Council joins the call from the Parliament in its November Resolution on the matter to request the Commission to include in its political priorities for 2024-2029 the improvement of working and living conditions and fair remuneration in the CCS.

In this resolution the Parliament put emphasis on the concept of fair remuneration, in particular the right to appropriate and proportionate remuneration which was granted to performers in the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive 2019/790.

In this respect we are delighted to read that the Belgian Presidency will “facilitate the exchange of best practices among member states regarding the implementation of the copyright directive in the Digital Single Market.”

With the law of 16 June 2022 you implemented the directive effectively, which unfortunately many others have not. We are sure that the Belgian initiative will provide a good framework for both the exchange of best practices and the monitoring assignment that the Commission must carry out under the Belgian presidency.

The sharing of such experiences is currently of great importance for the EU candidate member states. When the Belgian Presidency is “committed to support candidate countries in their efforts to join our Union”, we hope that you will ensure that these countries receive the necessary support to make our Union a safe workplace for their artists too.

Finally, we are looking forward to how Belgium will “prepare the positions of the EU and its Member States regarding various issues being discussed within the World Intellectual Property Organisation”.

A first important issue is the 2012 Beijing Treaty. Twelve years have already elapsed since this treaty was signed, with the intention of granting actors much needed and long overdue protection. Nevertheless, the EU has still not ratified the treaty. We sincerely hope that your Presidency will be the one that changes this and gives actors the support they deserve.

Furthermore, at the upcoming 45th Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, the topic of fair remuneration in the music and audiovisual sector will also need stronger and more outspoken support from the EU. It is time that WIPO finally takes this to heart, especially now that their agenda has been expanded to include artificial intelligence.

As the Belgian Presidency will “strive to finalise any remaining work on the AI Act”, it is important to guarantee that a good balance is found between the promotion of a European artificial intelligence industry and its respect of the copyright in the works they use to train their machines. Fair remuneration for all stakeholders in the cultural and creative industries, including our performers, should be one of the main objectives of any policy in this regard.

We know it will be difficult to tick off all the goals of the very ambitious program by June 30. This is especially true with the elections that will take place in Europe and also in Belgium. We know that we can count on you to ensure that the Belgian Presidency will keep the focus on what is important, including our European culture and the protection of those who are the face of that culture, our performers.

Please know that AEPO-ARTIS will always be available to provide any assistance possible. We have members in almost every EU Member State and through this network we can facilitate the collection and dissemination of information on any matters relating to performers.

On behalf of every performer whose work you have ever appreciated. Most respectfully,

Ioan KAES

General-Secretary AEPO-ARTIS

The post AEPO-ARTIS writes an open letter to the Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

AEPO-ARTIS writes an open letter to the Spanish President Pedro Sánchez Pérez-Castejón

AEPO-ARTIS — Wed, 05 Jul 2023 10:18:45 +0000

With start of the Spanish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, AEPO-ARTIS has addressed an open letter to the Spanish President Pedro Sánchez Pérez-Castejón with the goal to highlight the significance of culture and advocate for the enhancement of performer’s rights, aligning with the priority placed on social and economic justice during this presidency.

Dear President of Spain,
Dear Mr. Sánchez Pérez-Castejón,

This week Spain officially took over the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. For the next six months Spain will be leading the rest of the European Union in taking the most important decisions that need to be taken.

AEPO-ARTIS is a non-profit making organisation that represents 38 European performers ’ collective management organisations from 28 different countries, including the Spanish organisations AISGE and AIE. The number of performers, from the audio and audiovisual sector, represented by our members can be estimated at 650.000.

Looking at the ambitious program Spain has presented, we are grateful for the focus that is put on promoting greater social and economic justice and in particular the proposal to continue the debate at EU level on the need to improve the working, social security and tax conditions of artists through the promotion of a European Status of the Artist.

For AEPO-ARTIS, a strong protection of actors’ and musicians’ neighbouring rights is a vital element in such a Status of the Artist. This has already been recognised by the European Parliament. In its 2021 Resolution on the situation of artists and the cultural recovery in the EU the Parliament called copyright and neighbouring rights “the core of the fair remuneration of artists and creators” and insisted on the effective implementation of the 2019 Copyright directive with a strong focus on guaranteeing fair, appropriate and proportionate remuneration for performers.

So far only a few member states have effectively implemented this directive in a way that guarantees the principle of fair remuneration and three have not yet transposed it at all. We are therefore particularly pleased that it is Spain that has to guide these Member States in achieving an effective implementation.

Spain has a long tradition of copyright legislation that is based on respect for artists. With a non-transferable right to remuneration for authors and performers for all forms of digital exploitation, Spain is the EU Member State that offers our actors and musicians the best protection in all of Europe.

And the numbers show that this has benefited the Spanish music industry and audiovisual sector as a whole. AIE and AISGE have been able to collect and distribute remuneration for online exploitations for our performers without affecting other players. Promusicae’s most recent yearly report points out that the Spanish music industry saw its turnover increase by 12.43% in one year, for the third time in a row. And a recently published report by the European Audiovisual Observatory shows that Spain has climbed up to become the third most fiction film producing country in the EU. The climate in Spain is good. This is also confirmed by Netflix, which recently doubled its production capacity in Madrid.

We call upon the Spanish Presidency to continue to promote a strong protection of neighbouring rights and an effective right to remuneration for online exploitations during its Presidency. We trust that you will direct the Commission to closely monitor the effective implementation of the Copyright directive in all Member States with a focus on the effective improvement it has on the socio-economic position of our artists.

With the same objective, we call upon the Spanish Presidency to ensure that the ratification of the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances by the EU will effectively empower our actors and contribute to their overall Status.

Finally, we invite the Spanish Presidency to intensively collaborate with Belgium to continue this work when handing over the Presidency at the end of the year. Belgium recently took the brave political decision to bring its legislation up to the level of Spain and an intensified collaboration will help in achieving the common goal of effectively protecting performers throughout the whole EU.

We remain at your disposal to discuss any of the above further.

On behalf of every performer whose work you have ever appreciated.

Most respectfully,

Ioan KAES

General-Secretary AEPO-ARTIS

The post AEPO-ARTIS writes an open letter to the Spanish President Pedro Sánchez Pérez-Castejón first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

The dialogue must continue

AEPO-ARTIS — Wed, 31 May 2023 09:48:19 +0000

On Thursday, 25th May, at a conference ‘Four Years of the Copyright Directive’ AEPO-ARTIS gathered a broad range of stakeholders representing performers, producers, platforms and broadcasters as well as policymakers to discuss the current implications of the Copyright Directive on the lives and businesses of various players in the music and audiovisual sectors, as well as what can still be expected in the coming years.

Though it has been over four years since the EU Council and Parliament adopted Directive 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market, not all Member States have completed its transposition yet. Nonetheless, there is enough to look back at.

The conference witnessed a diverse gathering of stakeholders, including representatives from the music and audiovisual industry, policy makers, and experts from various fields, and it served as a platform for comprehensive dialogue that highlighted the potential effects of the Copyright Directive while examining cross-border compliance questions raised by platforms beyond EU jurisdiction, including offshore sports betting sites, and the opportunities and challenges the Directive still presents for performers, authors, and the cultural landscape as a whole. With engaging panel discussions, insightful presentations, and lively Q&A sessions at the end of each panel, the event shed light on the intricacies of the Directive and fostered meaningful conversations on its diverse transpositions.

MEP Axel Voss welcomed the participants with a video-message in which he looked back at the time where he as rapporteur for Parliament took part in the negotiations and stated that: ‘The protection of copyright is an ongoing duty and I wish we all keep fighting for our intellectual property’.

‘We are very happy that we’ve been able to gather representatives from not only our performers’ organisations, but also from the authors, the producers, streaming platforms, broadcasters, representatives of national governments, the European Commission and of course the European Parliament.’ said Ioan Kaes, General-Secretary of AEPO-ARTIS, Association of European Performers’ Organisation, who organised the event, adding that ‘It felt like bringing the Copyright Directive back to Brussels.’

Together with Marco Giorello, Head of the Copyright Unit at DG CNECT and Benjamin Feyen, Secretary General of the CCFG of the European Parliament, he discussed how the overall process of the Copyright Directive adoption and implementation went and what could be expected in the future, especially with the additional layer of complexity that comes with the fast development of technology, including the development of AI. And while general conclusion was that the true effects of the Directive are yet to be seen as the Member States only recently transposed it, it was acknowledged that the transposition came with a delay, resulting in infringement procedures against some of the Member States.

‘I think it is highly problematic.’ stated Benjamin Feyen, Secretary General of the Cultural Creators Friendship Group (CCFG) of the European Parliament addressing the two-year delay in implementation, ‘because this legislation brings a lot of rights to performers and authors, rights which should have been implemented but are not yet. So, for the last two years performers should have had remunerations that they didn’t have.’

The conference continued with a panel discussion on the music sector and the impact of CDSM on the European music streaming market that brought together influential voices from the industry.

Graham Davies, CEO of the Ivors Academy spoke about the situation of the performers in the UK while, when explaining the Belgian model of the transposition and inclusion of the ER right, Christophe Van Vaerenbergh, Managing Director of PlayRight stated that ‘The artists are in a much weaker economical position than the parties they are dealing with and literal transposition would not benefit these artists. It would not enhance or strengthen their position towards these different parties.’

The panelists engaged in lively debates on how the Directive affects the performers in the digital environment and, while they had different views on the topic, the common takeaway was that the dialogue between the stakeholders must continue.

‘It’s important to look at all actors within this market, and not just the relations between artists and platforms or artists and producers, to take into account the various partners and stakeholders that are part of this value chain.’ said Olivia Regnier, the Chair of Digital Music Europe. ‘Streaming services have a lot to bring in terms of enabling the market to grow, ensuring cultural diversity and providing tools to help artists grow their career. A number of things need to be solved through discussions, and in some cases, negotiations or practical solutions.’

‘I think putting all of us in the same room is very useful so that we can actually exchange, provide nuances and share further information’ she concluded.

Lodovico Benvenuti, Managing Director of IFPI Europe, presented the views of the record producers and found the conference to be ‘like a reunion of Copyright Directive veterans’, adding ‘It is very important to keep this discussion ongoing between all the actors of the creative value chain, whether this is platforms, performers, authors, producers, as we are. It’s very important because at the end of the day, we are on the same side of the fence. We want more resources, more remuneration for the creative community.’

The impact of the CDSM on the EU audiovisual streaming market was discussed in the following panel with experts Cécile Despringre (SAA), Gregor Štibernik (AIPA), Carolina Lorenzon (ACT) and Darya Gantura (Belgian Actress)exchanging their views. Although the Copyright Directive provides the same rules for the audiovisual as for the music sector, this panel focused on the difference in the practical effects. While Carolina Lorezon from the ACT focused on the challenges broadcasters face in keeping up the value of their content, Darya Gantura shared that for actors, so far, nothing has changed. The same contracts are still imposed and an increase in transparency is still missing. She looks forward to the moment when her CMO can put law into practice and provide her with a remuneration for streaming. But at the same time she said that she too would have to have the necessary patience for this, since several parties have challenged this new right to remuneration.

In a forward-looking session, the conference closed with a panel discussing the future presidency of the EU Council and its potential influence on copyright policies. Panelists Paul Laurent, Advisor for the Belgian Ministry of Economic Affairs, and Pál Tomori, Director of Hungarian CMO EJI, outlined their vision for the upcoming presidencies and their roles in advancing the effective implementation of the Copyright Directive across Member States.

Attendees expressed their enthusiasm for the conference and its impact on the industry. The conference concluded with a call to action, urging policymakers, industry representatives and artists to collaborate closely to ensure the successful implementation of the Copyright Directive across Europe.

The dialogue must go on as the Copyright Directive impacts all stakeholders and the conference was a great step towards collaborative work. Glad to see constructive discussions among the variety of stakeholders, Ioan Kaes, General-Secretary of AEPO-ARTIS said: ‘Today has proven that the debates are not closed yet. The discussions will need to continue and not only at a national level but also here in Brussels.’

Have a look how it was at the event:

The post The dialogue must continue first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Conference: Four Years of the Copyright Directive

AEPO-ARTIS — Wed, 24 May 2023 12:08:16 +0000

On Thursday, 25th of May, AEPO-ARTIS is holding a conference “FOUR YEARS OF THE COPYRIGHT DIRECTIVE” at the Thon Hotel EU (Rue de la Loi 75, 1040 Brussels/undergrounds Maelbeek or Arts-Loi) on 25 May 2023.

It has indeed been over four years since the EU Council and Parliament adopted Directive 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market. And even if not all Member States have completed its transposition, there is enough to look back at. And that is exactly what we will do, in addition to considering what will come next in the transposition procedure.

With the participation of a very broad range of stakeholders, AEPO-ARTIS will have a first look at the new state of affairs in the audiovisual and music sector and see how the Copyright Directive has changed the lives and businesses of performers, authors, producers and broadcasters over the past four years.

You can find the full programme here.

The post Conference: Four Years of the Copyright Directive first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Another study recognises the need for better remuneration of artists in the streaming economy

AEPO-ARTIS — Wed, 10 May 2023 06:28:49 +0000

A fascinating study written by Daniel Johansson of the Inland Norway University of Applied Science entitled “Revenue Distribution From Music Streaming – A Quantitative Analysis of Swedish Artists on Spotify” has been published and is available here.

Assessing the winners and the losers in the world of streaming, lessons can be learned for artists throughout Europe and beyond.

Do we want the revenue generated by Spotify and other DSPs to go to fake artists ‘creating’ making “white noise” recordings or is it time we found a way to make sure the money gets to those who deserve it, the creators and artists?

Scope of the study: what it covers

The study analyses all Swedish artists that have generated more than 1 million streams on Spotify since its release in 2008, gathers data for every track available from each artist and shows how individual genres have performed. Carrying out simulations of revenue generated by different categories of artists, it can (subject to certain limitations) show who are the winners – and who are the losers – in the Swedish Spotify streaming economy.

The study starts by stressing the need for a better understanding of the economics of streaming. The author examines the way the streaming model operates and provides a detailed explanation of e.g. why there is no such thing as a “per-stream rate”.

In order to carry out a number of simulations regarding revenue that might be received by various categories of artists, with various different types of record deal, he creates a model with a constant stream rate which is applied to the data collected.

The results are very revealing. Jazz, metal and classical artists fare very poorly, while artists in “niche” local language genres such as “epadunk” do very well, as do “playlist-friendly” newage/ambient artists

However, the simulation which shows the most profit is that of the “noise artist”, producing recordings of white/brown/pink etc noise. These are recordings of low frequency sounds, often designed for relaxation, concentration or sleep. One such “artist” can be estimated as generating more than $100,000 per month.

Scope of the study: what it does not cover

One of the most commendable aspects of this study is that it is aware of its own limitations. Without knowing the details of individual contracts between a record label and an artist, it is impossible to tell what amount the artist actually receives after the revenue they generate via Spotify has filtered through the label’s contractual labyrinth. As the author states, his simulations by necessity cannot take into account “advances and fixed costs like recording expenses, marketing, overhead costs and other details that are also a part of artist contracts”. The results of the simulations would of course be different if such things had been able to be taken into account, as the author acknowledges.

However, the author does make reference to the Music Creators’ Earnings in the Digital Era Study, which provides an insight into major label contractual practices.

– Record label contractual practices
The Music Creators’ Earnings study reveals the content of a 2020 Sony Music Featured Artist royalty

contract. Its provisions include: – Overheads

Under this contract, before any royalties are paid to the artist, Sony Music deducts 25% of gross revenue generated, which it uses to “cover its overheads”. It is remarkable that, as the study notes, “while a label’s overheads are fixed, the contribution that each release makes to those overheads will be based on 25% of that release’s gross revenue and will therefore rise as its revenue rises.”

– Marketing

This surreal situation with overheads is nothing when compared with the provisions regarding deductions made for marketing. 15% of gross revenue generated is deducted to cover “marketing” costs. This would be understandable were it to apply to e.g. the first year that the recording was released. However, these deductions are made throughout the entire life of the recording. For 70 years, 15% of revenue otherwise payable to the artist, will be deducted, disguised as marketing expenses, when of course no marketing whatsoever will actually occur for the vast majority of that time. Such practices may be legal, but they may also be deemed misleading and immoral.

– Investment by the artist

The author also does not have access to another vital component necessary to fully understand the artist’s position in streaming today. The investment made by an artist, both in terms of finance and time, is greater than ever before. An artist now needs to purchase equipment that will enable themselves to create high quality recordings. They need to spend time and money writing the songs, crafting them, rehearsing them in rehearsal rooms, before finally recording them. They then need to distribute their initial recordings on social media and other DSPs and to maintain a presence in order to achieve a sizeable following.

These tasks and costs were previously borne by the record label, which is why, together with their role in the manufacture and distribution of physical records/CDs etc, it was logical that they should receive a significant share of the revenue generated by the recording and it was logical that they should be allowed to recoup some of these costs against the artist’s share of the revenue generated. However, applying the same logic today, an artist ought to be able to recoup the investment they have made in a recording from the label’s share of revenue generated.

It was also logical that a record label should be legally defined as the sole “producer” of a record and benefit from the valuable copyright protection granted to producers. The definition of “producer” in international copyright law (the WPPT) is:

Article 2 (d) “producer of a phonogram” means the person, or the legal entity, who or which takes the initiative and has the responsibility for the first fixation of the sounds of a performance or other sounds, or the representations of sounds.

A record label may still meet this definition in the case of for example pre-packaged talent show contestants that “win” a record contract and are provided with a song, musicians, and a studio in which to record it. In other cases, record companies certainly do not meet this definition.

It is true that artists today have the option of being a DIY artist however the prospects of being able to sustain a career via this route are extremely small. The numbers speak for themselves: a 2022 study by the UK competition authority (CMA) shows that of the top 1000 recordings released in 2021 in the UK, 98% of them were tied to either a major record or major publishing label.

A system whereby modern royalty rates, contracts and revenue-splits do not take into account the role of an artist as the producer of their own recordings, and the investment they make in those recordings, is entirely obsolete.

– Equitable remuneration

Although this study does not directly cover the question of the need or otherwise to introduce a right to equitable remuneration, its findings contribute to a growing body of evidence that overwhelmingly supports such a right.

That body of evidence includes a study entitled “Streams and Dreams – A Fair Music Economy For All”, conducted by the same author as this study, in which he recommends that we “make use of both the Spain/Belgium ER model and the France voluntary agreement model, and that they both need to be balanced towards each other in a hybrid solution including all actors around the negotiation table. They are not in conflict with each other, they should complement each other.”

What this new study does address is “fair remuneration”, noting the fact that “many more artists stand perplexed over how their artistry does not translate into a fairer remuneration, at the same time as the intermediaries between the artists and their audiences report immense profits year after year”.

It is no wonder that artists are perplexed. Record label executive “remuneration” – such as the one time stock grant of up to $100 Million (and yes, that is in addition to the $250 million package received in 2021) payable to the Universal Music Group’s CEO – is exhorbitant. Why some of that amount cannot be shared with artists is, indeed, “perplexing”.

Conclusions

In the conclusions of the study, the author asks: “is it perhaps now time to start tweaking the streaming model towards a system that better reflects the immense cultural value that artists provide to fans and society at large?”

Those who have the interests of artists and creators at heart would answer with a definite “yes” and agree with him when he concludes by saying that:

“DSPs, labels, PROs, publishers, distributors, as well as legislators and politicians, all need to jointly focus on the broader picture; how to better remunerate the ones that in fact are the most important and most valuable asset, the music creators and artists.”

The post Another study recognises the need for better remuneration of artists in the streaming economy first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.

Streaming isn’t working for artists. What is the problem and how do we fix it?

AEPO-ARTIS — Fri, 05 May 2023 13:46:59 +0000

Although streaming is nowadays the main way of accessing music, performing artist sare not being fairly paid for their work.

On May 2nd – at the opening of the International Cultural Week in Stockholm – Swedish performers met with their European counterparts for a discussion on the problems inherent in streaming, and how to fix them.

Organised by SAMI, the Swedish Artists’ and Musicians’ Interest Organisation, and AEPO-ARTIS, the Association of European Performers’ Organisations, the panel discussion gathered over 130 music professionals and policy-makers from Sweden and across Europe, with many more joining remotely.

Dispelling a few myths, the panel started with a short explanation of how streaming works, and more specifically how it does not work for performers. It was explained that, contrary to what is often believed, platforms like Spotify do not pay musicians directly. Instead, they pay record labels who then distribute the money to featured artists only, based on the contracts between labels and artists. The inequity this creates is due to most of these contracts being unfair, leaving the musicians with a very low proportion (if any) of the revenue. In the case of non-featured artists (“session musicians”), they receive no share of streaming remuneration at all.

“The simple fact is that where there is human endeavour, and it’s making somebody else wealthy, that wealth, should at least be shared with the person who made the endeavour. And it’s kind of mind- blowing that you can create a business where that doesn’t happen… but here we are.” said Tom Gray, British musician, songwriter and founder of the #BrokenRecord campaign that aims to change current unfairness in the music industry.

But how do we change it? Anneli Axelsson, Swedish singer, musician, songwriter and President of the West Sweden’s branch of the Musicians’ Association commended the recent study “Streams & Dreams” by the Swedish academic Daniel Johansson, which supports the introduction of equitable remuneration and shows artists’ large-scale dissatisfaction with streaming.

Criticising a controversial report in Sweden which failed to recommend the introduction of an equitable remuneration right, she argued that its author had not listened to the voice of the artists, saying “It’s time to do that report again. And to do it right.” This criticism comes as no surprise, bearing in mind that numerous other studies have been published arguing in favour of the introduction of such a right.

Talking about the implementation of the Copyright Directive in Belgium, Tom Kestens, Belgian musician, songwriter and advisor to the Belgian Government, pointed out that Belgium was a country which did listen to artists. This led them to the conclusion that a right to equitable remuneration was the “best legal option for performers to be fairly remunerated for their work”.

He stated: “You have to look each other in the eye and say: ‘what do we really believe?’ At some point you have to make a choice about whether you will make a bold move. What the European Copyright Directive has done really well is to say to the whole of Europe, fair renumeration for artists is the right thing to do.”

PlayRight (the Belgian CMO for actors and musicians) will collect equitable remuneration from streaming platforms and distribute this revenue directly to performers. “The system has already proved to be very efficient. Spain has been applying it for years, leading to the overall greater satisfaction of artists” said Tom Kestens, adding that “the system is not complex to introduce”.

Addressing the consequences of not introducing a right to equitable remuneration, Tom Gray explained: “The problem is that linear broadcasting such as radio and TV is going down, but streaming is going up. We get paid from radio; we get paid from TV. Do we get paid from streaming? No, we do not. So what’s going to happen if legislators do nothing is that the situation will become profoundly worse.”

With a number of prominent Swedish politicians in attendance, including the former Minister of Culture Amanda Lind who expressed her disappointment that the Swedish inquiry into an unwaivable remuneration right did not lead to any concrete proposal, it seems that the message of the performers was heard and well received.

To quote Tom Kestens, “perfection is the enemy of progress”. It is now time for Sweden, and other EU countries, to show that they believe in artists and “make the bold move” of introducing equitable remuneration.

The post Streaming isn’t working for artists. What is the problem and how do we fix it? first appeared on AEPO-ARTIS.