D.I.Y.

Last.fm Throws D.I.Y. Acts Royalty Bone

BUT THERE’S NOT MUCH MEAT ON IT…

Last_fmLast.fm today launched it’s Artist Royalty Program which gives unsigned artists the opportunity to accrue royalties directly from Last.fm. The site claims this is the first time that D.I.Y. musicians can earn directly from a free streaming platform.

And while Last.fm claims the royalties are comparable to what they’re paying majors, how much can artists expect to earn? Not that much and certainly less than from internet stations like Soma.fm and Radio Paradise.  According to terms on Last.fm web site:

  • If your track is played on our free radio service you will accrue a 10% of the Share of Last.fm’s Net Revenue (see the definition of “Share” and “Net Revenue” in the terms and conditions) from the free radio service.

  • If your track is played on our personalized premium radio service, you
    will accrue the greater of either 10% of the Share of Last.fm’s Net
    Revenue from the personalized radio service, or US $0.0005 for each
    complete transmission on the personalized radio service.
  • If your track is played on our free on-demand service, you will accrue
    30% of the Share of Last.fm’s Net Revenue from the on-demand radio
    service.
  • If your track is played on our premium on-demand service, you will
    accrue the greater of either 30% of the Share of Last.fm’s Net Revenue
    from the premium on-demand service, or US $0.005 for each complete
    transmission on the prepaid or subscription on-demand service.

To be fair, Last.fm is paying a whole lot more than most other 2.0 services who pay unaffiliated artists nothing.  Kurt Hanson of RAIN wrote, "…this new program is simply an efficient way to enter ‘boilerplate’ agreements with indie artists, rather than some gracious decision on Last.fm’s part to pay them — which they’re obligated to do anyway."

And is it a fair revenue share?  I tend to think not…or am I just being too old school?

Bruce Houghton on 07/09/2008 in D.I.Y. | Permalink | Comments (4)
Share on:

4 Comments

  1. It’s a bit light on the revenue…. but something is better then nothing. And it’s an opening for other services that might specialize in certain types of musical content to up the ante.
    Either way… it’s another benchmark for the indie artist to strive to achieve some success from.

  2. Tech crunch mentioned that the end artists end up making more through the last fm deal then thewy would through a label in soundexchange.
    Fair or not, it is better

  3. Also wanted to mention, even if the revenue isnt great, small indie artists are probably trying to build an audience at this point in their careers. Last fm is providing them a platform more or less for free.

  4. Bravo, last.fm (CBS!)– this is sorta a step in the right direction. I think it’s important in this digital age to figure out a way to make musicians money from their art. If you look at both sides of the industry spectrum — from the labels on one end to Creative Commons on the other — most musicians aren’t making too much, and there needs to a new model attached to digi music.
    Last.Fm’s model, however, isn’t quite right. First, they severely under pay the artists. Big surprise, eh? Just because it pays more than sound exchange, doesn’t mean its ideal. I mean, SoundExhange is essentially the de facto digital arm of the RIAA. But, at least they’re engaging in some mild profit sharing with the musicians.
    I think the next year or so will experience new ways for musicians to make a buck online. this is just the first bang.

Comments are closed.

Top