Main Site | Join Robin Hood Coop | Projects | Events | Blog | Media | Forums | Mailing List | Twitter | Facebook

Cooperative music streaming service owned by artists

Music artists are not pleased of royalty payments that music streaming services pay to them. There have been several protests, latest was couple months ago when Paul McCartney etc. demanded more percentage of royalties to artists. Why can t artists themselves form cooperative and start their own music streaming service? Although independent artists may be poor, there are thousands of them, and as artists have progressively become copyright holders of their own music, now even rich millionaire singers are basically “independent artists”.
Why can t those artists form their own streaming service, that is advertisement paid like Spotify and other free streaming services? They could concentrate all of their material to that cooperative streaming service. There are some small cooperative streaming services like Resonance and Catalytic, but they are small. And that coop streaming service should be as free as Spotify, paid using advertisement money in free version, and paid subscription for extra functionality, like Spotify.
There are thousands or millions independent artists around the world, although they may be poor individually, together they can form coop that has more than enough capital to make own music streaming service, and some of those “independent artists” are rich millionaires. The whole music streaming age that we now live, began with initiative by Brian Eno and Peter Gabriel.
Also selling digital music can be arranged with coop model, instead of iTunes there can be digital download cooperative.
For music videos, instead of Youtube videos there can be some video streaming service that pays more than Youtube, for example some of many video streaming services from India, low quality videos can be free and high definition versions of same videos in Bigflix etc., or also cooperative video streaming service can be made just for music videos, with low quality audio (higher quality audio is for music streaming cooperative, and highest quality for digital music selling cooperative).
“17 top blockchain in music companies” is list of blockchain-based music distribution. Artist cooperative don t perhaps necessarily need blockchain model but it is an option. “Artist-friendy music streaming alternatives to Spotify”. Independent record companies can also put their music to this cooperative platform / platforms.
Many artists are signed to big multinational record companies, but if it becomes clear that this cooperative digital platform (or many platforms) give more money percentage to artists / record companies than Spotify and iTunes, perhaps big record companies too move to those coop-based digital platforms.
Idea is to concentrate all digital content that artists have, music and videos, to those coop-based platforms. If Spotify and Youtube have global monopoly, why can t artist owned cooperative too be global monopoly, if only way to have digital streaming of music or download tracks or watch music videos of those artists is to use artists own owned global cooperative digital platform (or platforms). Perhaps in case of music videos simply some commercial video streaming service that pays more than Youtube is enough.
“GroupCast: preference aware cooperative video streaming”, “MicroCast: cooperative video streaming”, BandZoogle, “Social-aware cooperative video distribution via SVC”, CoTech Cooperative Technologists, Feendo net musician owned streaming.
If all artists around the world that make music form global cooperative digital distribution platform (or many cooperative platforms, one is like Spotify, another like iTunes or Tidal, but streaming and selling downloads can be combined in one platform only so two is not needed, and perhaps video streaming / video downloading platform if existing commercial solutions are not enough) but unlike Tidal all artists around the world can perhaps join to this music coop. It is like those organizations that take care of artists copyrights, “musician s union”, but it not only handles copyright issues, it also distributes and sells digital music.
Visual video artists and independent small-budget filmmakers can also use the same video distribution service that musicians use. Or anyone who wants to post a video. Sort of cooperative version of Youtube. If existing commercial video distribution services are not enough profitable for artists / filmmakers.

Another way global cooperative of musicians can be helpful is the case of sample clearing. The right to use samples is a time consuming process and sometimes difficult, because of copyrights. If this global cooperative of artists sells and distributes music through internet, because it is global cooperative perhaps it can have simpler way to check out sample copyrights, and artists have easier and faster way to find out if sample of some song is available for sampling or not using this cooperative. Artists like Girl Talk and John Oswald have difficulties to make and publish music because of difficult sample clearing procedures.
It is also possible to make music software available too in this global cooperative, then it not only sells and distributes music through internet, it can sell music software in the internet too. Softsynths and all kinds of music software, software plugins, effects plugins that are used in amateur and professional studios etc. This is one option what large music cooperative can do. Music software is sold using the same internet platform that music coop uses to sell music, for example. Also free music software can be distributed using music artists own global coop, free softsynths etc.
Also: “OPUS: decentralized music sharing”. Audiodraft.
The use of blockchain in artists owned coop will perhaps only make things difficult for customers that stream or buy music, but it is one option. Most of music streaming services do not use blockchain, for just streaming music without paying (royalty money comes from advertisements) using blockchain is perhaps overkill. If idea is to compete in music streaming market with Spotify etc. then also this artist coop must provide free streaming like Spotify and collect money through adverts like Spotify does. Coop has also paid premium option for streaming like Spotify and all other streaming services have. And artist coop can sell music downloads like iTunes. If blockchain / cryptocurrency technology offers significant advantage to have profit in selling music through internet -business, then it can be perhaps used.

Also if there exists global cooperative of musicians / artists and every artist around the world can join this coop, and this coop sells and distributes music through internet, also independent record companies can join the coop. If artist is signed to some independent record label he/she is perhaps not “independent” artist anymore, but this record label is, and if record label is not one of the giant international record companies, also this independent record label can join the coop.
“Why music ownership matters” thesmartset com, “A fair music streaming model is possible” Anil Prasad. But if intention is to compete in music streaming market with Spotify etc., then at least some of the artists material must be available for free to audiences (meaning artist collects money from adverts in music streaming page but consumer does not have to pay for streaming), perhaps not all of artists material is available for free, but at least some songs would be in free streaming, and perhaps rest / most of artist s music is in “premium” streaming only (consumer must pay), something like Spotify premium or other system.
Audius. PIAS cooperative. Bustle Music. Tuned Global.
“Music streaming must switch to a fair and logical payout model”. “Kevin Brennan MP proposes a new right to fair remuneration”. “IMPALA proposes 10-point plan to make the most of streaming…”
Perhaps is no need to concentrate all of artists digital content to one global artist cooperative, perhaps this artists own digital content can be in this one big cooperative, but also in Audius, Resonance, Feendo net, etc., streaming / music downloading services that offer fair payments to artists.