As discussed in detail in these three articles by The FADER and MixMag, the controversy focuses on SoundCloud’s new policies against poor financial results ($ 29 million of losses) last year and pressure from The three majors (Universal, Sony, Warner) to enforce the copyright laws more strictly, whose aim of collecting in the form of constant complaints is the one that has caused that economic hole in the first instance.
This has led SoundCloud to “sell” itself to these majors and to market laws (at least, in part) in order to survive. On the one hand Universal-Sony-Warner owns between 3 and 5% of the shares of the company and guarantee and supervise the payment of royalties to their artists for each fragment or complete theme that is used in the different mixes uploaded to SoundCloud (DJ mixes, mixtapes, radio programs).
For another SoundCloud includes advertising content for income and launches premium accounts with monthly fees to its users and launches a new application whose characteristics can be analyzed in the following link https://on.soundcloud.com. Basically it is about paying three different levels of quota that allow for as many levels of space and time to upload music as well as a better positioning of the same in the internal searches in proportion proportional to the level acquired (Partner / Pro / Premier). I’ll bet that you need this link to buy real soundcloud followers, the best site to buy real follower for your soundcloud, facebook, twitter, or you can choose to buy shazam followers for your shazam application.
This platform is part of SoundCloud’s agreement to sign with Warner and Universal to pay royalties to the artists of those labels whose content has been uploaded to SoundCloud.
It should be noted that in terms of copyright this is what is said and “recommended” by SoundCloud:
What is copyright infringement, and how can I avoid it?
If you are a copyrighted copyrighted work copyrighted by the copyright owner, you may not copy the copyrighted work copyrighted to the copyright owner (s). , Or make it available on the Internet. The best way to avoid copyright infringement is to ensure that you do not use anything created by anyone else. Simple as that. The artists interviewed by The FADER admit to using SoundCloud frequently to exchange ideas with other artists and the general public in a very satisfactory way and are not at all happy with the changes. They are not quite sure how they will continue to work in this direction, and assume that a new platform will probably emerge similar to the “old” SoundCloud in the short to medium term. The controversy is served.
Particular attention is drawn to what is said about the promotion of artists. SoundCloud was born as a platform to share musical ideas for free and non-profit, taking advantage of the communication power that the Internet provides us for it. In fact, that is the ideal that have been pursued many other platforms previous (Myspace, Bandcamp) and that have sometimes made us think that an artist no longer needs to be attached to a label to get the broadcast they want.
But this ideal seems to be shaken (like so many other “freedoms” of the internet) when you start talking about obtaining a decent income that allows at least subsist artists and coordinators of musical stamps. The laws of the capitalist market, which are the only ones we know or are allowed to use, apply with all their crudeness as in any other commercial field. And then arise premium rates, exclusive content, advertising, positioning in search engines depending on the pulp that is invested.
The promotional effort is as hard and the chances of success as limited as they have always been (since the record industry exists as such) or even harder, given the stifling dominance exercised by a few giant recording conglomerates. Is there an alternative?
At the moment there are a number of small artists who have already dropped out of SoundCloud and the company has said that it works on a solution that “satisfies all parties”.
From TIU we have pressed the opinion of several affected by this controversy, trying to open the fan to different users of SoundCloud, whether “active” as musicians and DJs or “passive” as promoters or simple listeners.