this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
105 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

58774 readers
3418 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Okay, I was ready to call out Spotify, until I read this:

The assumption there has been that streaming services would not be paying more money out, but rather that a portion of those payouts would be paid directly to artists (via a collecting society). Thus, ER [Equitable Renumeration] would reduce labels’ share of the royalty pie. Spotify is saying that in its currently-proposed form, that’s not what would happen under the Uruguayan budget bill.

If it’s the label that’s supposed to be paying, but Spotify might actually be charged, that’s a valid reason for Spotify to be concerned.

As long as artists are compensated fairly, which is the point of this bill, I’m happy.