last edited by pamelahute
@marcus-leblanc @Catherine-Fimmell Thanks to you both for feeding this topic and making the dabate really interesting.
As far as I am concerned, I’m really unconfortable with the classical opposition label - artists. Artists can do a lot on their own, but at some point a lot of them enjoy having a team behind them, in order to grow their audience, sell their cds, deal with logistics, pay for promotion, help them with decisions, put them in touch with producers, venues etc. I don’t think this artist / label war is relevant on every occasion. A lot of labels behave terribly, and this has to change, and all artists should fight for this to evolve, but some labels are definitely on the artists side.
Thanks to the blockchain technology, everything is transparent and with the smart contract system, it’s clear and public and everybody knows what your licensing deal is.
So why close doors? An economy works with a good share of value, and labels can play a part.
What if tomorrow a very cool or famous label shared all his catalog on musicoin, offering transparent shares to their artists on the platform? Why would we refuse that? Why exclude initiatives? I don’t like that. Labels themselves have to evolve and understand they need to change their ways. And they need to be part of the change.
Here is an example. I own my record label, and I release my work through the label, but I also work with other bands. All revenues coming from my songs streamed on musicoins are split 50/50 between my label and me, because that’s the deal I have on paper. Of course, I could keep everything for myself. But I actually like the idea that we share the revenues and the value, as stated in the contracts. It’s crystal clear.
And it’s also how the business will keep moving and growing. With those funds, the label can invest on new artists and keep the cultural world alive and thriving, discovering new talents for music fans.
I would never close doors to labels.