Music Streaming Services Point to Labels in Inquiry into Unfair Artist Royalties

Royalties from music streaming services, including Apple Music and Spotify, are weighted unfairly against artists, according to a committee of Members of Parliament in the UK (via BBC News).

apple music logo
An investigation by the UK parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee into music streaming found that artists see "pitiful returns."

The committee called for a "complete reset" of the market in the UK, with artists being given a "fair share" of record label earnings from streaming. All of the money streaming services currently pay goes to rights-holders, who then pass on a small share to artists. Labels and publishers currently keep the vast majority of profits.

MPs proposed that royalties should be split evenly between labels and artists, instead of the average current rate where artists receive around 16 percent. Other recommendations included new legislation that allows musicians to reclaim the rights to their work after a certain period of time, improves artists' rights to adjust contracts, and increased transparency about how much money is flowing from streaming services.

The British Phonographic Industry (BPI), which represents the recorded music industry in the UK, said that streaming was "enabling more artists than ever" to earn a "long-term, sustainable income" and that any new policies should be properly examined to prevent "unintended consequences for investment into new talent."

The music industry's three major labels, Sony, Universal, and Warner Music, warned that any disruption could damage investment in new music and argued against the idea that streaming was comparable to radio, where artists already receive an equal 50/50 royalty split.

Representatives from streaming services, on the other hand, were not directly opposed to changing the royalty system but noted that 70 percent of their income already goes to labels, publishers, and artists, suggesting that it should be labels who reduce their share of royalties to give more to artists. Nevertheless, ‌Apple Music‌'s Global Senior Director of Music Publishing, Elena Segal, cautioned:

It is a narrow-margin business, so it wouldn't actually take that much to upset the so-called apple cart.

‌Apple Music‌ is believed to pay better royalties than Spotify and YouTube, which made it less of a focus for MPs, who were more concerned about the fact that YouTube accounts for 51 percent of music streaming while contributing just seven percent of music industry revenue.

The committee also said that streaming services should ensure that curators who make playlists adhere to a "code of conduct" to avoid bribes and favoritism toward certain artists that could lead to some music being unfairly overrepresented.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

apple launch feb 2025 alt

Here Are the New Apple Products We're Still Expecting This Spring

Thursday February 20, 2025 5:06 am PST by
Now that Apple has announced its new more affordable iPhone 16e, our thoughts turn to what else we are expecting from the company this spring. There are three product categories that we are definitely expecting to get upgraded before spring has ended. Keep reading to learn what they are. If we're lucky, Apple might make a surprise announcement about a completely new product category. M4...
Apple iPhone 16e Feature

Apple Announces iPhone 16e With A18 Chip and Apple Intelligence, Pricing Starts at $599

Wednesday February 19, 2025 8:02 am PST by
Apple today introduced the iPhone 16e, its newest entry-level smartphone. The device succeeds the third-generation iPhone SE, which has now been discontinued. The iPhone 16e features a larger 6.1-inch OLED display, up from a 4.7-inch LCD on the iPhone SE. The display has a notch for Face ID, and this means that Apple no longer sells any iPhones with a Touch ID fingerprint button, marking the ...
prioritize notifications ios 18 4

Everything New in iOS 18.4 Beta 1

Friday February 21, 2025 1:08 pm PST by
Apple finally released the first beta of iOS 18.4 to developers for testing purposes, and while the beta is lacking some of the Apple Intelligence features we were hoping for, there are some notable new additions. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Priority Notifications - Apple Intelligence There is a new Priority Notifications feature that can show you your most...
iphone 17 pro asherdipps

iPhone 17 Pro Models Rumored to Feature Aluminum Frame Instead of Titanium Frame

Tuesday February 18, 2025 12:02 pm PST by
Over the years, Apple has switched from an aluminum frame to a stainless steel frame to a titanium frame for its highest-end iPhones. And now, it has been rumored that Apple will go back to using aluminum for three out of four iPhone 17 models. In an investor note with research firm GF Securities, obtained by MacRumors this week, Apple supply chain analyst Jeff Pu said the iPhone 17, iPhone...
ios 18 4 ambient music

iOS 18.4 Adds New Ambient Music Feature

Friday February 21, 2025 11:06 am PST by
In iOS 18.4, there's a new Ambient Music option that can be added to Control Center. There are four different sound categories, including Sleep, Chill, Productivity, and Wellbeing. Each category can be added to Control Center separately, and tapping one plays a random selection of sounds or music from that particular category. You can't choose what's playing from Control Center, but if...
iPhone 16e Feature

Apple Denies Speculation Surrounding iPhone 16e's Lack of MagSafe

Friday February 21, 2025 8:01 am PST by
Apple has confirmed that its custom-designed C1 modem in the iPhone 16e has nothing to do with the device's lack of MagSafe support, according to Macworld. Following the launch of the iPhone 16e, there was some speculation online about how MagSafe magnets might have interfered with the C1 modem's cellular connectivity performance, and this was considered to be a potential reason for the...
Generic iOS 18

Here's When Apple Will Release iOS 18.4

Wednesday February 19, 2025 11:38 am PST by
Following the launch of the iPhone 16e, Apple updated its iOS 18, iPadOS 18, and macOS Sequoia pages to give a narrower timeline on when the next updates are set to launch. All three pages now state that new Apple Intelligence features and languages will launch in early April, an update from the more broader April timeframe that Apple provided before. The next major point updates will be iOS ...
oppo find n5 fingers

World's Thinnest Foldable Phone Launches in Europe and Asia

Thursday February 20, 2025 8:55 am PST by
Oppo has launched the Find N5, the world's thinnest foldable phone yet. When closed, the book-style foldable measures 8.93mm. That's less than a millimeter thicker than an iPhone 16 Pro, and thinner than the Honor Magic V3, which was the previous record holder. The device is barely thicker than its USB-C port. Indeed, Oppo has suggested that the obstacle to making it any thinner is now "the...

Top Rated Comments

captain cadet Avatar
47 months ago
Media is basically the lowest Demonitor - people like media but do not seem to be willing to pay for it.
This appears that most of the money is going towards the Record labels themselves, with very little regard to the actual artists themselves. It's just artists are getting further screwed due to pay-per-play where ~100 streams = 1 purchase

Legislation should focus on the split of royalties more than streaming service as the problem
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kc9hzn Avatar
47 months ago
The artist pay issue predates streaming, royalties for music recordings have always been poor. Unless this inquiry leads to changes in compensation rates for physically distributed music, then it’s another “new media bad” or “foreign businesses bad” situation. That last angle is seldom explored, but I think one of the next major political and economic issues of the next couple decades is going to be digital protectionism.

But, for years, it’s been a general rule that artists make their money from touring and live performances. The artist that doesn’t tour is the poor artist. In a certain sense (that’ll seem almost perverse to most people, based on how we usually view this issue), this seems almost fair. It’s the label that makes an ongoing expenditure on the music, not the performer (maintaining copyright and the issues that come up with legal rights holdings, reissuing albums in newer formats, ongoing promotion of tracks and albums, re-printing albums that have gone out of print [less of an issue in digital, but the vinyl resurgence suggests it’s still a going concern], and, much like in any employer-employee relationship, the label takes the brunt of the economic risk of an album [a poor performing album won’t directly bankrupt a performer, but it CAN bankrupt a label]). Additionally, if I perform work for a company and leave for another opportunity, even if the work I performed for the first company results in greater profit, I generally don’t get paid for that, and that’s common for most professions. But because the performer is the public face, we identify more with them than the label. Anyway, touring is far more lucrative because of the merch sales that accompany the tour, the direct pay for time worked, the difficulty in accurately bootlegging a live performance (a live stream is not the same thing as the real deal, even a professional live stream). Touring/live gigs is even more important for self-published indie groups, for all those reasons, and because it’s their major promotional channel, and this despite the fact that they have full legal rights to their music and directly earn the money that would usually be the label’s cut.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
captain cadet Avatar
47 months ago

This kind of legislation would definitely bury Spotify (who already have relatively narrow margins), but Apple Music could afford it with a slight price increase I guess
I mean I would not be surprised if generally streaming goes up in cost soon - similar to how everyone announced on the same day they were going to support lossless
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Expos of 1969 Avatar
47 months ago

Yeah it sucks how much concerts cost though. I miss the days of $10 & $20 concerts.
I miss the $7.50 days. One of my first concerts in Montreal...




Attachment Image
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
danmart Avatar
47 months ago
The full article is worth a quick read if you can access it (I’m in the UK). The Select Committee isn’t massively critical of the streaming providers, they are focussing on the publishers.

There is also an interesting infographic showing the change in revenue mix by format over the years, too.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
TVOR Avatar
47 months ago

As a full-time music producer/engineer myself, labels aren’t necessarily screwing over artist, that’s not to say they don’t have their fair share of greed like all large corporations. Labels offer larger advances in exchange for smaller royalties percentages, you can also just have a publishing deal with a label and keep a much higher percentage of your royalties. At the end of the day you could still be a successful independent artist, it’s not like labels are the GATEKEEPERS to making any sort of income in the music industry.
As an ex full-time producer I couldn't agree more! Yes...as you said there are good deals and bad deals, but on the whole, the deals where the artists get low percentage splits are where there have been large advances so that's a big financial risk for them as they have no idea what the income will be like. If you are Rihanna then you probably get a fairly substantial advance and a good royalty because you are somewhat of a known quantity. But if you are a new artist in your first deal, it's a huge risk for the record label so the risk/reward ratio will be tipped heavily in their favour.

The other thing is that people are acting like these poor, oppressed musicians are forced to sign to a particular label at gunpoint or something! They all have the choice not to sign a particular deal. If they feel that the deal doesn't give them what they want then don't sign it! It is analogous to going for a job interview, being offered a job for a lower salary than you were hoping, accepting said offer, and then bleating about it on social media to try to bully the company into paying you more! And I am sure that some people reply that that's OK if you have choice but when there is some kind of industry-wide collusion and price fixing then you don't have the choice to say no. Actually...you do...if no labels are offering you the deal you want then go the DIY route (as you suggested) or...and you might want to sit down for this...perhaps consider that you don't have what the labels want and therefore they aren't prepared to take the financial risk...you know...perhaps consider that you aren't actually entitled to a record deal on the terms that you want and either accept what you are offered or go do something else...

Just saying....
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)