dotherightthing,
Thanks so much for accepting my research results as your Answer. I'm
glad I kept digging and that I was able to find *something* that you
are able, or adapt for use in your project.
To make it official, here is the Answer, again...
************************************************************************
Such a simple request, and so hard to find. I have been unable to
locate any mention of the amount Napster pays MusicNet for per-song or
per play-costs for rights-holders on either Napster, or Napster To Go.
I have used the keyword search function at Napster's SEC Filing page
and come up empty. I was shuffled around for a couple hours on the
phone. I am just giving you my findings, unless you wish to pay me
for them, they are free. It's been fun but I'm out of ideas, so sorry
to bag out on you. I have included below all my findings.
Here's Napsters most recent Financial Filing. A link to all filings
is at the bottom.
http://investor.napster.com/edgar.cfm?DocType=&Year=&Version=US
I can find no mention of the fees paid for licensing. I have searched
various ways. I have looked at and searched dozens of filings. You
may want to try again, I have looked at the screen to long and could
be wrong.
On page 64 of 93, above, this is the closest to proof af ANYTHING I
can find, and it says they are operating under a "standstill" --and
are paying NOTHING until
..."Under copyright law, we may be required to pay licensing fees for
digital sound recordings we deliver in our Napster service. Copyright
law generally does not specify the rate and terms of the licenses,
which are determined by voluntary negotiations among the parties or,
for certain compulsory licenses where voluntary negotiations are
unsuccessful, by arbitration proceedings known as CARP proceedings
which are subject to approval by the United States Copyright Office.
Past CARP proceedings have resulted in proposed rates for statutory
webcasting that were significantly in excess of rates requested by
webcasters. CARP proceedings relating to music subscription and
non-subscription services offering music programming that qualify for
various licenses under United States copyright law are pending. We
cannot predict the outcome of these negotiations or CARP proceedings
and may elect instead to attempt to directly license music content for
our subscription and/or non-subscription services, either alone or in
concert with other affected companies. Such licenses may only apply to
music performed in the United States, and the availability of
corresponding licenses for international performances is unclear.
Therefore, our ability to find rights holders and negotiate
appropriate licenses is uncertain. There are other negotiations and
CARP proceedings in process which will set rates for subscription
music services and services that deliver digital downloads of music,
and the outcome of these negotiations and CARP proceedings will also
likely affect our business in ways that we cannot predict. Voluntarily
negotiated rates for mechanical licenses with respect to streaming and
conditional digital downloads with the Harry Fox Agency and National
Music Publishers Association have not been agreed to, and we are
currently operating under a standstill agreement until such time as
such rates are negotiated. No agreement has been reached with
performing rights societies such as ASCAP or BMI regarding whether
digital downloads constitute public performances of copyrighted works
that would trigger payment of public performance royalties. Depending
on the rates and terms adopted for these voluntary and/or statutory
licenses, our business could be harmed by increasing our own cost of
doing business, as well as by increasing the cost of doing business
for our customers. We anticipate future CARP proceedings relating to
music subscription delivery services, which may also adversely affect
the online distribution of music...."
If this constitutes an Answer, let me know and I'll gladly post in the
Answer box.
This page has an estimate for PressPlay (before it became Napster)
http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/LIS/archive/mp3/18SONG.html
Remember, this estimate is what the Artist gets per song, the Record
Label gets half of what it collects. READ THE ARTICLE. I couldn't
access the 2nd page, but it IS relevant.
..."As one rock manager computes it, if a consumer buys the standard
Gold Plan on Pressplay, paying $19.95 for 75 songs downloaded to a
hard drive and 750 streamed so that they can be heard only once, an
artist, after these deductions, gets $.0023 per song downloaded. To
earn a penny, more than four songs must be downloaded..."
Napster pays rights-holders through MusicNet.
http://www.musicnet.com
Services - Partner Services - see list.
REFERENCE:
Scroll down to: Napster Licenses With MusicNet
http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_mix_daily_news_13/
..."After a day of speculation, Napster announced a deal Tuesday that
would allow the service to sell music from three of the five major
music labels as part of its proposed subscription service.
Napster, RealNetworks and MusicNet have reached a licensing agreement
whereby Napster will become an affiliate of MusicNet, the digital
distribution platform for downloading and streaming music that is
expected to launch later this summer.
Under the deal, Napster joins RealNetworks and America Online as the
third distributor to team up with MusicNet; RealNetworks and America
Online announced licenses for the MusicNet service in April. BMG
Entertainment, EMI Recorded Music and Warner Music Group had
previously said that they will permit their libraries to be delivered
to Napster once Napster operates in a "legal, non-infringing manner"
and successfuly demonstrates that rights holders will be compensated
for their works by implementing a technology that accurately tracks
the identity of files on Napster's servers.
However, this agreement bars Napster from forming a similar licensing
agreement with Duet (MusicNet's competing digital download service
formed by Sony and Universal Vivendi) unless the other labels come to
terms with MusicNet.
"MusicNet is focused on providing a platform that will help consumers
who are used to the experience of Napster to find, acquire and enjoy
music in a manner that's legal, reliable, secure, and supportive of
artists and rights holders," said Rob Glaser, chairman of the board
and interim CEO of MusicNet.
"Our relationship with MusicNet underscores our commitment to
supporting the members of the Napster community in discovering and
listening to music of all types from around the world," said Hank
Barry, interim CEO of Napster..."
Here's what www.MP3.com Pays (This is an EXCELLENT article)
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,37841,00.html?tw=wn_story_related
..."MP3.com, which challenged the recording industry on copyright
issues, lost its court battle and now pays 1.5 cents per song for
people to store music in its virtual lockers, and 1/3 of a cent each
time a song is streamed. That money goes to the musicians who perform
the work..."
Here's what I found in my travels:
MusicNet and pressplay prepare to replace Napster
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3755/is_200109/ai_n8971128
After this, Roxio went on to acquire all three...
Anyone Remember Napster? - 9/24/01
http://www.law.wayne.edu/litman/classes/cyber/newdev01f.html
..."Napster has settled the lawsuit brought by music publishers,
thanks to the intervention of Senators Orrin Hatch and Patrick Leahy,
who oversaw recent settlement negotiations. Napster will pay $26
million for past infringement, plus a $10 million advance on future
royalties for future authorized use of music. It can't actually get
going on that future authorized use, of course, until it settles the
lawsuit brough by the record companies. Presumably the good Senators
are even now trying to persuade the recording industry to accept
something less than Napster dead with a stake through its heart. Read
Brad King's story for WIRED News..."
After Napster - The Inevitable Accent of Peer-to-Peer Networks,
LiveHives, Smart Mobs and Massive Subscription File-Sharing Services
http://mediawhore.wi2600.org/nf0/convention_cdroms/defcon11/Amidon/dc-11-amidon.doc
Scrool down about halfway to: Detailed Outline. A very concise and
easy to scan timeline.
Napster asks help from Congress - January 9, 2002
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/2556.cfm
..."Napster's CEO Konrad Hilbers told on Monday to musicians, lawyers
and music industry executives that Congress should force major record
labels to license their music catalogs to smaller independent music
firms with a mandatory per song rate if labels don't agree to license
their music otherwise.
Napster, which is trying to implement it's upcoming legal music
service, is struggling because so far it hasn't signed any licensing
deals with major record labels. And opening a music service without
major record label content isn't something that's going to work very
well..."
Napster CEO quits - May 14, 2002
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/2926.cfm
..."Napster's CEO, Konrad Hilbers, has announced that he will quit the
company after Napster's board rejected the proposed deal to sell the
company to Bertelsmann..."
Napster files for Chapter 11 - June 3, 2002
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/2997.cfm
..."Napster has filed, as everyone already expected after it sold its
assets to German Bertelsmann, for Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code.
The decision doesn't mean that company has vanished, but instead it
gives company protection from its creditors until company
restructures. Its assets were valued at $7.9M and it has liabilities
of over $100M, including hefty bill to its attorneys caused by the
lengthy war against RIAA and music companies which began in late
1999..."
Napster buyout blocked; fire sale likely - Last modified: September 3, 2002
http://msn-cnet.com.com/2100-1023_3-956382.html
..."update A federal judge Tuesday blocked the $9 million sale of
Napster to German media giant Bertelsmann, a decision likely to force
the onetime file-swapping powerhouse out of business......As a result
of the record companies' and music publishers' opposition, Napster's
creditors will be denied substantial repayment and the company will
likely be forced into Chapter 7 liquidation," Napster CEO Konrad
Hilbers said in a statement. "As with most start-up technology
businesses, Napster's technology is of little value without the
talented team that created it, so it is an occasion of loss on many
levels..."
Scroll down 7-8 paragraphs to: The Ghost of Napster Looms
http://www.onlinereporter.com/TORbackissues/TOR333.htm#Melee%20in%20LA:%20Sharman%20Launches%20Major%20Counteroffensive
..."Last year in the record companies' suit against Napster, federal
judge Marilyn Hall Patel changed her opinion and ultimately decided to
let Napster pursue its claims that the record companies violated
antitrust law by colluding in setting up Musicnet and Pressplay and
granted them "favorable" terms and licenses. Her order gave Napster
the right to depose the labels on the same charge Sharman now borrows.
"The evidence now shows that the plaintiffs have licensed their
catalogues of works for digital distribution in what could be an
overreaching manner," Patel wrote in her Napster decision last
February. "The evidence also suggests the record labels' entry into
the digital distribution marketplace may run afoul of antitrust laws."
Back then Napster was wholly dependent on Bertelsmann Music Group
(BMG) for funding. Shortly after Patel's judgment, BMG pulled the plug
on Napster and forced it into bankruptcy. Napster's investigation into
the labels' alleged collusion was never completed. However, the action
did prompt the Justice Department to initiate its own ongoing
antitrust investigation. If Judge Wilson permits Sharman to
investigate, its lawyers may be bumping into government attorneys.
Subsequently the labels started licensing non-proprietary music
services such as Listen.com for its Rhapsody service and Britain's
OD2. Hmmm..."
Napster 2.0 coming October 9 - Oct. 02, 2003 Scroll down to: "
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/columnists/gmsv/6916231.htm
..."Roxio, which purchased all that was left of the pioneering venture
in November 2002, is preparing a test launch for its Napster 2.0
digital music distribution service.
Napster 2.0 will launch for testing on October 9. Company spokesman
Seth Oster told Reuters that full details of the service would be
announced at a launch event in New York that day.
The service will begin with a catalogue of 500,000 songs and will
offer music lovers a choice of either individual track downloads or a
premium subscription service.
Roxio acquired Napster for $5 million in 2002. The company has also
inked a deal with Samsung, under which the latter company will sell a
digital audio player that will work with Roxio's service. This week,
Napster and Microsoft revealed a specially designed Napster 2.0
interface that will be part of Microsoft's new media centre
product..."
SEC Web Site
http://www.sec.gov/
NOV 30, 2003 - Page 30 of this SEC Filing:
http://investor.napster.com/edgar.cfm?DocType=&SortOrder=Date+Descending&Year=&PageNum=5#
..."Roxio and Napster, LLC, formerly known as Pressplay, have been
notified by a number of companies that the Napster online music
distribution service may infringe patents owned by those companies.
Roxio is investigating the nature of these claims and the extent to
which royalties may be owed by it and by Napster, LLC to these
entities. The amount of money, if any, necessary to settle these
claims cannot be determined at this time..."
Page 33:
..."From time to time we receive claims and inquiries from third
parties alleging that our internally developed technology or
technology we license from third parties may infringe the third
parties? proprietary rights, especially patents. For example, Napster
has been notified by several companies that its services may infringe
their respective patents. Napster also receives from time to time
notices from artists, record labels and other asserted content right
holders identifying music content that they believe is being made
available via Napster?s services without proper authorization. Napster
generally removes the allegedly infringing music content from its
service. Additionally, MGI Software, which we acquired in January
2002, has been notified by a number of companies that certain of MGI
Software?s software products may infringe patents owned by these
companies. MGI Software also has been notified by a number of its OEM
customers that they have been approached by one of these companies
regarding possible patent infringement related to certain MGI Software
software products that they bundle with their respective computer
products. Third parties have also asserted and most likely will
continue to assert claims against us alleging infringement of
copyrights, trademark rights or other proprietary rights, or alleging
unfair competition or violations of privacy rights. We could be
required to spend significant amounts of time and money to defend
ourselves against such claims. If any of these claims were to prevail,
we could be forced to pay damages, comply with injunctions, or stop
distributing our products and services while we re-engineer them or
seek licenses to necessary technology, which might not be available on
reasonable terms. We could also be subject to claims for
indemnification resulting from infringement claims made against our
customers and strategic partners, which could increase our defense
costs and potential damages. Any of these events could require us to
change our business practices and harm our business..."
RIAA Press Room - Documents relating to Napster
http://www.riaa.com/news/filings/napster.asp
Napster - SEC Filings
http://investor.napster.com/edgar.cfm?DocType=&Year=&Version=US
Notice the search function: "Search SEC Filings by Keyword"
FindLaw's Napster page
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/napster/#documents
A song-swapping timeline - 1.1
http://www.epidemic.ws/song-swapping/EN/A%20song-swapping%20timeline.html
Use the find feature and enter keywords like Napster, Riaa, etc. More
details than the link above.
Clarification by cynthia-ga on 28 Feb 2005 05:17 PST
I hate being unable to get to the bottom of an issue once I have
committed to finding it, so in the interest of passing along what else
I have found (I didn't stop searching).
Still, all I can find is more articles stating that the Artista are
not being compensated, yet....except....
MAYBE I found something, I'm not sure, it's waaay to complicated for
me to figure out exactly what this rate sheet pertains to. I'm fairly
certain that digital downloads that are non-interactive (with a web
site) fall under the NEW SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES rules of the new "Music
Online Competition Act" (link below). This link is from
soundexchange.com, also linked below.
SCROLL DOWN TO: NEW SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES (at this link)
http://www.soundexchange.com/rates.html
****************************************************************************
Here's a list of what else I have found. SOme links are more relavent
to your requested Answer than others, but all are interesting.
Internet royalty case lands in Supreme Court
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/12/03/copyright031203
Interesting article about Canada's actions.
Closer, but still not what you want:
How Music Royalties Work (the whole article is interesting)
http://stuffo.howstuffworks.com/music-royalties6.htm
Internet royalties
..."With the explosion of the Internet and the ease of downloading
music onto your computer, a whole new royalty arena has opened up in
recent years. Record companies usually treat downloads as "new
media/technology," which means they can reduce the royalty by 20% to
50%. This means that rather than paying artists a 10% royalty on
recording sales, they can pay them a 5% to 8% rate when their song is
downloaded from the Internet. In the case of downloaded music,
although there is no packaging expense, many record company contracts
still state that the 25% packaging fee will be deducted.
An alternative to this royalty payment method also exists for Internet
music sales. While it is most often used by Internet record labels, it
may still catch on as recording artists begin to push harder for it in
their contracts. This other method creates an equal split of the net
dollars made on music downloads between the record label and the
artist. This net figure is arrived at after the costs have been
deducted, including costs of the sale, digital rights management
costs, bandwidth fees, transaction fees, mechanical royalties to
songwriters/publishers, marketing costs, etc..."
Summary of Music Online Competition Act (note definition of NEW
SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES)
http://www.house.gov/boucher/docs/moca-summary.htm
..."Recent hearings in the House of Representatives and Senate
highlighted several problems with current law that are impeding the
deployment of innovative, legitimate Internet music services to an
eager listening public. The Music Online Competition Act is narrowly
tailored to resolve these particular problems, and thereby promote a
legitimate online music marketplace that will benefit the public, the
creators of copyrighted works, and America's technology industry..."
FEB 3, 2005 - Napster Subscription Service May Pay Royalties Based on
Music Device Playcount
http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1681
No Napster-To-Go numbers here, but there is a description of how Artists are paid:
..."In contrast, online music stores such as Apple?s iTunes sell songs
for 99 cents each or $9.99 per album. The consumer owns the purchased
songs, with certain restrictions on reproduction and use. Artists
receive royalties at a rate of 5% to 8% for songs sold in this way.
Artists also receive royalties when their songs are streamed or
broadcast through online radio. Because of the Digital Performance
Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995, broadcasters must pay royalties
to the recording artists as well as the songwriters and publishers.
few years ago a system was worked out via arbitration of the U.S.
Copyright Office, in which a royalty of seven cents per song, per 100
listeners, would be paid to a non-profit collection and distribution
agency called SoundExchange.
SOUNDEXCHANGE (Explore this site for more info. It doesn't appear to
represent ALL Artists, yet)
http://www.soundexchange.com/
..." a nonprofit performance rights organization jointly controlled by
artists and sound recording copyright owners through an 18-member
board of directors with nine artist representatives and nine copyright
owner representatives. We have been designated by the U.S. Copyright
Office to collect and distribute statutory royalties to sound
recording copyright owners and featured and nonfeatured artists. Our
board members and staff are dedicated to providing exceptional service
and advocacy for artists and copyright owners to ensure the fair
compensation for the use of copyrighted sound recordings..."
Especially note this link:
http://www.soundexchange.com/licensee/forms.html
Music on the Internet - A Topographic Tour of the Online Music World
http://www.minidisc.org/music_internet.html
Current and Breaking News in the Digital Music Industry
http://www.whatsthedownload.com/music_news/index.aspx
Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws
Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#114
AND FOR CARP: http://www.copyright.gov/carp/index.html
Royalty payments basis for securities
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2000/02/14/focus5.html
..."Provision of Statutory License Payments to Artists: The sound
recording statutory performance license provision specifies that
royalty payments should be shared equally by performing artists and
recording companies. Current law funnels these payments to artists
through the recording companies. Our bill requires these payments
instead to be made directly to the artists or to a collective
organization representing the artists..."
**************************************************************************
Here's the Announcement in the Federal Register on Feb 6, 2004 as
mentioned at the SoundExchange site.
http://www.soundexchange.com/licensee/documents/Fed_Reg_2_6_04.pdf
Note the contact info at the bottom right of Page 1. Further down,
royalty rates are listed and discussed.
~~Cynthia |
,
2 Comments
)