We backed up Spotify (metadata and music files). It’s distributed in bulk torrents (~300TB). It’s the world’s first “preservation archive” for music which is fully open (meaning it can easily be mirrored by anyone with enough disk space), with 86 million music files, representing around 99.6% of listens.
So let me get this straight: Anna’s Archive taking 100% from artists = good, Bandcamp taking ~20% = good, but Spotify taking ~30% = bad? That suggests the issue isn’t artist pay, it’s just which platform you’ve decided to hate.
And Anna’s Archive’s framing around ‘free access to culture’ seems to mean free for scraping and ideological cover, but for-profit when it’s packaged and sold to AI companies. That’s not anarchy - it’s anarcho-capitalism.
ha! no, what royalties? play the song one million times and they get a dollar? spotify can get bent. long live bandcamp.
So let me get this straight: Anna’s Archive taking 100% from artists = good, Bandcamp taking ~20% = good, but Spotify taking ~30% = bad? That suggests the issue isn’t artist pay, it’s just which platform you’ve decided to hate.
And Anna’s Archive’s framing around ‘free access to culture’ seems to mean free for scraping and ideological cover, but for-profit when it’s packaged and sold to AI companies. That’s not anarchy - it’s anarcho-capitalism.
i’m not so sure about your numbers there, friend.
also bands don’t make money on streaming or selling records in stores anymore. they make money selling tickets and product at the shows.
source: i have run a live music venue for 35 years. watching the changes in the business model has been wild.