Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee (2021)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee: Economics of Music Streaming (2021)
Title: Economics of Music Streaming
Author(s): DCMS
Year: 2021
Citation: DCMS (2021) Economics of Music Streaming. House of Commons
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Submissions of written and oral evidence of interested parties in response to Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee call for evidence on the Economics of Music Streaming. The report describes the information gathered:

"We have received almost 300 pieces of written evidence, organised an engagement event with emerging artists and held seven oral evidence sessions during which we heard from performers, songwriters, composers, music companies, trade bodies, collecting societies, government ministers and, of course, the streaming services themselves".

Data Type: Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: Yes
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2021
Funder(s):
  • House of Commons

Abstract

"We launched our inquiry in October 2020 to consider the impact of music streaming on the creators and companies that comprise the music industry and examine the long- term sustainability of the industry itself."

Main Results of the Study

• "Streaming has undoubtedly helped save the music industry following two decades of digital piracy but it is clear that what has been saved does not work for everyone. The issues ostensibly created by streaming simply reflect more fundamental, structural problems within the recorded music industry. Streaming needs a complete reset."
• "The major music companies and independent record labels have consistently asserted that music streaming is straightforwardly ‘making available’, and therefore performers should be remunerated as though it was a sale. However, this classification does not consider the complexities of streaming that sets it apart from other modes of consumption."
• "Despite being an important part in the music creation and music streaming process, song rightsholders are not effectively remunerated for their work.”
• "Metadata issues compound the poor terms on which creators are remunerated. Whilst there is a significant challenge, it is not insurmountable."
• "The Government must make sure that UK law is not enabling the outcome of market dominance. This means that independent labels must be supported to challenge the majors’ dominance and creators must be empowered to offset the disparity in negotiating power when signing with music companies."
•"As long as the major record labels also dominate the market for song rights through their publishing operations, it is hard to see whether the song will be valued fairly as a result."

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The report makes a number of recommendations to the Government. Of most relevance to copyright law and IP markets are:
• "We recommend that the Government legislate so that performers enjoy the right to equitable remuneration for streaming income. This would be relatively simple to enact and would appropriately reflect the diminished (and increasingly externalised) marginal costs of production and distribution associated with digital consumption."
• "The Government should require all publishers and collecting societies to publish royalty chain information to provide transparency to creators about how much money is flowing through the system and where problems are arising."
• "The Government must oblige record labels to provide metadata for the underlying song when they license a recording to streaming services. It should push industry by any means necessary to establish a minimum viable data standard within the next two years to ensure that services provide data in a way that is usable and comparable across all services."
• "We recommend that the Government refer a case to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), to undertake a full market study into the economic impact of the majors’ dominance. The Government should urge the CMA to consider how the majors’ position in both recording and publishing has influenced the relative value of song and recording rights."
• "The Government should require all publishers and collecting societies to publish royalty chain information to provide transparency to creators about how much money is flowing through the system and where problems are arising."
• "The Government should explore the practicalities of creating or commissioning a comprehensive musical works database and task the IPO with co-ordinating industry work on a registration portal so that rightsholders can provide accurate copyright data to necessary stakeholders easily."

Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Green-tick.png
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Green-tick.png
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Green-tick.png
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Green-tick.png
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Green-tick.png
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

{{{Dataset}}}