I am proud to be part of a growing creator movement that shares a common call to equity for artists. Our leaders come a diverse array of backgrounds and possess incredible expertise across businesses sectors. We are, as it is said, having a moment. Some of this comes down to circumstance. Several factors unique to our time—including information sharing and new ways to collect data on the experiences of creative workers—offer opportunities to amplify the artist voice in important conversations.
I don’t know of any magic wand that can be waved to make things perfect for everyone. But I do believe it is important to have options. As is the case with most things, making an appropriate choice means negotiating a range of interests—short term and long term, individual and group, social and economic, personal and professional. There are also external interests to understand and acknowledge. It’s not enough to have a great game plan for your own team; you need to know what the rest of the league is up to. (Did I really just make a sports reference?)
You may have caught wind of an attempt to update America’s copyright laws. Don’t get too excited; we are nowhere near a comprehensive overhaul. That’s not actually the worst thing in the world, even if the status quo feels untenable. You know how Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld managed to shift American foreign policy after 9/11? Because they had a plan that had been in development for decades, and no one else did. The Bush cabinet was also stocked with experts in Soviet-era geopolitics. Guess who Dubya listened to? I don’t mean to conflate creative industries and the response to terrorism. I’m just saying that culture workers would benefit from having a plan that isn’t dependent on the conventional wisdom of those currently in a position of influence.
Here’s what it looks like right now. The House Judiciary Committee has marked its territory on intellectual property. And the current Chairman, Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), does not seem disposed to a piecemeal approach. This makes it harder to move a standalone bill absent consensus among key interests (or at least a pledge not to oppose).
Understand that these interests are wary of ceding any political ground, even where a proposal would not materially affect them. Congress itself is similarly divided. Normal partisanship is bad enough, but with copyright and technology, divisions exist even within the same party.
But that’s not all. The big picture reveals a global war between multinational corporations for control of our digital networks and the information that flows through them. This conflict will eventually conclude, as all conflicts do, but not until certain outcomes become inevitable.
It is possible that one side will use the current status quo to press their advantage until opponents either acquiesce or are absorbed. Given the haphazard application of antitrust law, the latter is not an insurmountable obstacle. However, we are unlikely to see the emergence of an early victor. Why? Because factionalism within the media and technology sectors is more Great War than Greatest Generation.
I am staunchly pro-competition, but occasionally I find myself thinking that regulators might as well give up the farce and allow any old company to combine. Marriage equality for multinationals! Maybe we want one network to rule us all and in the screen-glow bind us! Then I realize how awful that would be.
Clumsy metaphors aside, the differences between tech and content companies are often exaggerated. Tech behemoths understand that people don’t go online to experience an efficient digital packet-switching protocol. It’s the content. And entertainment overlords have more or less successfully transitioned to a data and service model (though large music companies are not as transparent with certain data in order to maintain leverage under existing licensing structures).
Although they may seem imperious, tech companies face plenty of challenges. Especially edge-of-network service providers like Netflix and Spotify. Comcast, which owns NBC/Universal, is attempting to destroy the former by playing fast and loose with net neutrality. Like other telcos and cable companies, Comcast employs arbitrary consumer data caps that penalize Netflix users but allow unlimited binging on the company’s own over-the-top service. Will the FCC step in? Perhaps, but it is unlikely that any strong action will be taken until a verdict is reached in the ISP’s legal jihad against net neutrality. Spotify is vulnerable because it is partly owned by the major labels who want an exit just as bad as the company’s executives and private investors. It hardly matters that Spotify’s $8 billion on-paper valuation can’t possibly be sustainable. Don’t have a business model after IPO? Goldman-Sachs keeps plenty of matches.
Unless something changes, I predict that the primary distributors of digital content in the future will be Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook. Call them the Four Horseman of the media apocalypse.
Or don’t. Just know that the aforementioned have paths to revenue besides entertainment media (note I did not say profit). And not to further offend the CEOs in my sector, but music is hardly the main focus. At best, it’s a data honeypot. The giants of Silicon Valley are fighting to be your car, your TV, your personal AI. The rest of us are meant to be guided in consumption even as we are consumed. Operation Ouroboros.
That doesn’t mean entertainment isn’t important. Make no mistake, tech companies now understand what major labels and film studios have long known: producing original content allows for greater control, provided there is a clear way to make money. This realization, along the content industry’s erratic approach to licensing, will hasten a Balkanization in access. And if this ends up compromising revenue, it will be blamed on piracy. (Piracy is onerous and hardly victimless, but that doesn’t mean that it should be used to evade responsibility for poor business decisions.)
In the old days, you could get the same hit record at the independent shop as you could a Virgin Megastore. I don’t know that this center can hold. What this will mean in the long run is intense competition for talent and exclusive distribution rights. Creators will face a new lottery with much larger payouts and far fewer winners. Maybe that’s not the end of the world, but I’m not sure I’d call it an improvement over 20th century distribution models.
Some sectors are more resistant to Balkanization. Take theatrical movie releases, for example. A delicate alliance between motion picture theater owners and Hollywood studios has long been maintained. The cinema delivers higher margins for studios and provides crucial leverage in downmarket distribution. And the theaters get to make mad lucre in marked-up concessions. (Popcorn does not need to cost ten bucks, people.)
Sony Motion Pictures (a division of Sony Electronics Corporation) and Universal Studios (owned by Comcast) are more or less equal competitors in theatrical distribution. So long as executives pray to 3D superheroes, cinema experiences will be available to consumers under more-or-less-uniform conditions. Challenges to this system have thus far been few. Netflix’s tried to break into theaters and failed, as most cineplexes bowed to pressure from the motion picture studios. (I expect virtual reality to have an impact, but it is difficult to predict how large.)
Episodic television is clearly up for grabs. In my view, Amazon is going to win this particular skirmish. Amazon has mastered vertical integration, and content delivery is merely one cog in the machine. Compare to Netflix, which has to either license (expensive) or produce (expensive) without any other revenue generator. Apple is not yet in the original content game and is betting on hardware, even though there are any number of set-top devices already on the market, several of which have additional functionality (such as video game consoles). Google makes the vast majority of its money from advertising, but they face challenges in mobile and home entertainment environments. Amazon is a global online retailer of everything; entertainment content gives them a new way to collect data on consumers to sell them other stuff. Countless Americans already have access to Prime content as part of the company’s discount shipping incentive. Amazon can keep on making and scraping indefinitely. Hell, they may even beat Apple in the long game.
Music is more complicated (which is kind of a running joke). Navigating and negotiating the sea of rights can be daunting, even though there is no inherent technological barrier to streamlining these processes. Once tech companies begin to directly invest in music projects and artists, they will push for laws that limit exposure to risk and reduce inefficiency. This may eventually pit music creators against one another. Some will choose to defend the label and publisher model, because they don’t have the leverage of the global superstars who can call their own shots, but nevertheless benefit from up-front investment (advances) provided by more traditional music companies. But tech can break artists, too. After all, they have the data and know what to look for. Tomorrow’s music deals will be configured to maximize the value of data for participating parties. But who gets to play, and under what conditions?
There are no saviors, only potential partners. Choose wisely, and where possible, ethically.
If incumbent copyright aggregators are unable to attract and retain talent and deploy these assets in a politically strategic way, they will ultimately lose the war. This is also true for digital service providers, though to a lesser extent. Get in the game or else policy will be driven by PewDiePie.
Distraction is an ever-present concern, even for the big players. The tech sector is full speed ahead with the Internet of Things (which now includes cars) because they know that not all of today’s app unicorns will fit in a driverless Prius. The focus is now on the emerging marketplace for networked devices that serve as background utilities. In order to complete the transition, technology companies and investors must successfully address privacy and security concerns that could compromise their agenda. This may lead to a lack of lose focus on other properties, such as entertainment delivery. Look for the signs and plan accordingly.
Heresy time: it is possible, and even occasionally useful, to align with corporate agendas. However, this is always a risky strategy, best managed by those with reputational standing and political skill. In the short term, corporate partnerships can make certain goals more achievable. But understand this: at the 40,000 foot level it really doesn’t matter what flag a multinational corporation is waving—they all make business decisions based their interests, not yours. And news flash: they will always have more leverage until we find ways to unify.
I am starting to believe that national and global markets are not where the creative revolution happens. Art should also minister to those closer to home. Be subversive by using the tools of the mass market in service of localized resilience or even resistance. The challenge is to nurture human networks and establish the infrastructure to aid in broader knowledge-sharing within the creative community. Hey, that sounds like organizing! Whatever you might call it, the idea is to build strength on the ground while simultaneously investing in the pipeline to federal policy.
All of this must happen our own terms. It is crucial that we have all the details before committing to a response. Be demanding of any entity that purports to advance your interests. Trust but verify. Accept that strategic alliances are not the same as corporate capture. Establish and defend your independence. Ally with those who see independence as a virtue and can assist you in its maintenance.
Art is subjective, and not all of it essential—at least not at an individual level. However, art in general reveals truths that other media cannot. This clarifies the overarching goal: to allow for the largest number of artists to work at creating essential art. Do you see how this may differ from what the warring factions want?
Now you have wisdom. Go forth and apply it.
