Distribute revenue from streaming services more fairly to musicians

The EU Parliament wants to reform music streaming. The aim of a new resolution is to change the distribution of the revenue that services generate and distribute to creators.

Whether it’s Apple Music or Spotify – it’s so easy. You pay around ten euros a month – the subscription runs in the background – and you listen and listen. And it’s also convenient: the playlists bring variety to everyone’s ears. Apparently anyway. What really goes on in the background of the streaming services – how they put together their playlists, one way or another – is a trade secret, at least for now.

European MP Niklas Nienaß finds it unfair how the money is distributed to those who made the music. He accompanied the development process of the resolutions for the Greens in the European Parliament.

It is supported by a broad majority from conservative to left: “At the moment all the money is being thrown into one pot and distributed based on streaming numbers. Instead, we want to look – similar to how CDs used to work – what does the individual person listen to? And If the person only listens to a single song once a month, then that song is apparently worth ten euros to the person, and then the artist also gets his ten euros for it.”

Now things are different, say MEPs who want to change the music streaming market. Anyone who pays ten euros for a subscription but only listens to a jazz pianist playing a long piece once a week and nothing else could not expect the actually logical consequence – that the artist would then receive a large part of these ten euros. That’s not the case now – while short pop pieces that thousands listen to dozens of times a day can expect disproportionately generous royalties, it is said.

Many authors receive nothing at all because there are too few clicks

The fact is that many authors get nothing at all because they are clicked on less than 1,000 times a year. Quantity counts – quality falls by the wayside, warn MEPs.

For parliamentarian Nienaß, it should also be clear in the future how the popular playlists are put together, which can of course significantly enhance individual songs: “It’s a complete mystery. We want to open it up first. And then bring in some justice: That is , promote smaller artists, European musicians, regional musicians, give them the opportunity to be found on the platforms, because they often just disappear.”

Means: The streaming providers should open their algorithms. Christopher Annen, musician at AnnenMayKantereit, also rejects offers to authors such as: “You give up part of your income and we will get you onto a playlist more quickly” because they would lead to cut-throat competition and because it is not clear whether musicians then actually end up where they want to go more quickly – or end up with less income again.

Balbina Jagielska from the Academy for Popular Music Polyton sees other disadvantages of the streaming services’ song policy: “Without reforms, we are moving into a future in which diversity is no longer important, but only the tip of the spear, and what remains only represents nor the interest of the platforms that post the music. There will then be fewer high-quality offerings.”

One percent of the artists receive 90 percent of the income

Digital platforms such as Apple Music or Spotify have up to 100 million songs and instrumental pieces available. Around two thirds of annual revenue – a good 18 billion euros worldwide according to the European Parliament – is earned from streaming. After Great Britain, Germany is the largest European market for streaming services. According to the services, a fifth of this is distributed to the artists, but 90 percent of it only goes to one percent of the musicians.

The streaming services know the problem, but point to a well-thought-out strategy that should ultimately help small and large people – and point out the difficulty of alternatives, which could then lead to injustice elsewhere. Nevertheless, they are open to debate.

This also applies to Matthias Hornschuh. The composer is the spokesman for the creatives in the “Initiative Copyright”: “The streaming services also have many advantages compared to the time when they didn’t exist. But they must bring fairer forms of participation for the authors, which are also reflected in the The principle of cultural diversity is oriented and ensures that there will continue to be many different musicians and styles in the future who will also find their audience and make a living.”