Follow Us

DMN on Feedburner
Connect with:
divider image

And Here’s the Entire Amazon Streaming Music Contract for Publishers…

Last week, we published the first two pages of this.  Now, we have the full thing.  This leaked copy was actually mid-signature, and offers the most substantive proof yet that Amazon is preparing a major music streaming music release.

Exact release date?  Still unknown, though publishers are being asked to return signed copies by May 1st.

Amazon_Streaming_Contract_01

Amazon_Streaming_Contract_02

amazoncontract3

amazoncontract4

amazoncontract5

amazoncontract6

 

blue bar background graphic
Comments (14)
  1. Anonymous

    So they’re not going to pay for promotional excerpts and promotional complete streams, and they define what’s promotional complete streams.

    Nice.

    Wonder if they are going to stream stolen music, as well. They do sell stolen software.


    Reply
    1. dave

      they also sell live bootleg CDs…


      Reply
  2. questions

    posted this on the original — i just got this same contract (microlabel) and was trying to figure out if it’s worth signing. unfortunately the comments above are not helpful. what made me pause wasthe below line under Mechanical Royalties:
    “ADSI will pay … (i) 21% of the amounts expensed by ADSI (in accordance with GAAP)for the rights obtaind from record companites or other master recording owner… less the the public performance royalty amounts that will be expensed…”
    and this line under Public Performance royalties:
    “Publisher’s Performance Pro-Rata Shate of (i) 11% of the amounts expensed by ADSI… multiplied by a fraction…”

    QUESTIONS:
    -What does “expensed” mean in this case? (does it mean after they written off some costs? or does it mean accumulated and delivered? or what?)
    -Are 21%, and 11% reasonable, or set by some law? why not 100%?
    -if i don’t sign it, does that mean in the future a possible law will bring a higher rate… or nothing?
    -sign or don’t sign?


    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      “sign or don’t sign?”

      I would never work with Amazon.


      Reply
      1. unsightful

        thanks for your informative comment; it’s really given insight into the issue.


        Reply
        1. Anonymous

          Fair enough. Here are the main reasons not to work with Amazon:

          1) You never know if Amazon’s Intellectual Property products are legitimate or stolen.

          2) You never know how Amazon sets your price. They may sell your song for $1, $0.1, $0.01, or they may decide to give it away for free. If they do so, you won’t get a cent.


          Reply
  3. Jimmi

    Gentlemen, prepare your DMCA templates. That’s all I have to say. Fair warning.


    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      Yeah. :(


      Reply
  4. TuneHunter

    Business kindergarten taking over on all fronts the leftovers of music industry!

    Why educated folks are involved with so destructive activities? There is 100 billion dollars of music goodwill!

    Why they are so busy to create 25 billions of unfair to creators and their own investors mud?


    Reply
  5. Grammy Producer

    Here it goes possible bring em to their knees plan.

    Pro rights organizations (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC) need to firmly stand up for the membership and demand a fair share of the monies being earned or music will suffer, and head into decline.

    Those Pro rights organizations should boycott by pulling all music catalog from those unwilling to pay a fair royalty to the song creators including the performers of the music.

    Time to get tough, take a stand and push back hard!


    Reply
    1. Paul Resnikoff

      But, rates are determined by statute in many cases. That’s part of the reason why NMPA and David Israelite are challenging current rate structures in court. They are hobbled by government-mandated per-stream rates.


      Reply
  6. R.P.

    I don’t think anyone that commented here understands this agreement.


    Reply
    1. JR

      I’m afraid, increasingly less and less people understand anything other than the hype that one group pushes out over another. The “Streaming is good” folks push out math, the “Streaming is bad” folks push out math, the piracy folks push out math etc etc and none of it is accurate. One this is certain, today’s artist has less ways to make money.

      This agreement is very much in line with what is out there. As far as the legal maneuvering going on to change the rates agreements like this use to determine payment, I am concerned that ANY non compulsory rate become a negotiated rate, which will leave the independent artists further out, and I suspect that the major labels will then negotiate a greater access fee for themselves. I draw your attention to the Warner Clear Channel deal which in my opinion,is legal payola, and essentially eliminates any non major from playing on their radio networks.

      The future is going to require a lot of innovative business affairs, it is hard when the people most concerned are not well informed.


      Reply
    2. hippydog

      Quote “I don’t think anyone that commented here understands this agreement.”
      I dont think anyone who READ IT understands it either.. ;-)


      Reply

Leave a Reply

Connect with:


eight − 4 =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. OUR SPONSORS

  2.  
  3. Most Heated!