Dae Bogan To Provide Mentorship To Music Makers And Tech Founders At The Rattle Los Angeles

RattleCCPitch2018 from The Rattle on Vimeo.

 

I’m excited to announce that I will be providing mentorship to music makers and tech founders at The Rattle when it launches in Spring 2019 in Chinatown, Los Angeles

WHAT IS THE RATTLE?

The Rattle is a members-only studio space and music incubator shared by a collective of independent artists, producers, tech makers, film makers, startups and people hacking careers in music.

 
WHAT DO MEMBERS RECEIVE?

As well as shared music studios, venue, writing rooms, film locations and a coworking space, Rattle members can enjoy top tier mentorship, production support and advice, tech incubation, workshops, events and concerts.

 
PRELAUNCH SIGNUP

The Rattle LA prelaunch signup page & form is LIVE, there is no financial commitment at this time – but as we have just opened the virtual doors to our LA community – I encourage anyone/everyone interested in joining the Rattle to sign up right away.

 
The first 50 superhumans to put their names down, lock in their spot at the founding member rate of $350 per month vs $500. (Includes full membership and 45htrs of monthly studio time)
 
 

Apple To Recruit College Students For Apple Music From UCLA Herb Alpert School of Music

I am pleased to announce that Apple has selected my Billboard-recognized class, Music Industry Entrepreneurship and Innovation, at UCLA Herb Alpert School of Music as a preferred source to recruit aspiring music industry professionals into its college internship programs at Apple Music.

Upon successful completion of an internship and graduation from UCLA, recent grads may become eligible for full-time employment at Apple music divisions.

An Apple Worldwide Recruiting representative will visit my class in January 2019 to promote their internship program to my students and answer any questions that students might have.

I am pleased with Apple’s decision to partner with universities and educators that deliver best-in-class education and experiences to students who may become tomorrow’s music industry leaders.

In reviewing my class students have shown great appreciation for the course and the speaker series that I curate throughout the quarter:

Hi Dae, Just wanted to thank you for an awesome class. This was one of the few classes at UCLA where I felt I was taught skills, not just about the subject matter but in how to go about achieving my career goals, that were applicable to my endeavors and will be used for the rest of my life. I got more out of it than I had with any other course here and I would highly recommend your class to to anyone interested in a music industry career.

– Student testimonial, Winter Quarter 2018

Without a doubt one of the most useful classes I have taken in my undergraduate career at UCLA. Professor Bogan has so much real world knowledge and knows how to convey that knowledge in a classroom setting immensely well. All the course material was invaluable to my progression and aspirations of being in the music industry. Every lecture was extremely well-prepared, with amazing guest speakers and information that I will be using for the rest of my life. Professor Bogan did a phenomenal job and I will be recommending this class to all my friends interested in music or starting their own company. Can’t say enough good things about this class.

– Student testimonal, Winter Quarter 2018

In addition to the relationship with Apple, I am excited to announce that I’ve established a relationship with music tech start-up accelerator Techstars Music that allows me to recommend student and alumni owned start-ups for consideration to receive seed investment and to participate in its accelerator program.

I look forward to continuing to add value to my course to offer students one of the best experiences in their academic careers at UCLA.

Music Licensing Collective: Call for Nominations

mlc
NOMINATION PERIOD NOW OPEN FOR SONGWRITER-MEMBER SEATS OF MUSIC LICENSING COLLECTIVE BOARD/COMMITTEES
 
Nashville, Tenn. (November 5, 2018) — Nominations are now open for songwriter members of the Board of Directors, Unclaimed Funds Committee and Dispute Resolution Committee of the Music Licensing Collective (MLC) to be submitted to the US Copyright Office for approval as established by the recently passed Music Modernization Act. Prospective nominees can be submitted at http://www.mlcsongwriters.com through 11:59pm CST, December 5, 2018.
 
Per the statutory requirements of the Music Modernization Act, a new digital music mechanical licensing entity is being formed called the Music Licensing Collective (MLC). By statute, there will be songwriter representatives on the Board of Directors of the Music Licensing Collective (MLC) as well as the Unclaimed Funds Committee and Dispute Resolution Committee. Four (4) self-published songwriters will be selected for the Board of Directors; these positions require that an individual be a professional songwriter who currently controls his/her own publishing. Additionally, five (5) professional songwriters will be selected for the Unclaimed Funds Committee and three (3) professional songwriters will be selected for the Dispute Resolution Committee. (The only requirement for these positions is that a songwriter be eligible to collect royalties in the US.)
 
American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), Nashville Songwriters Association International (NSAI), Songwriter’s Guild of America (SGA) and Songwriters of North America (SONA) have each named two songwriters to a ten-person selection committee to review nominations, evaluate candidates through a multi-step process and ultimately select songwriters for service to the original Board and Committees of the Music Licensing Collective (MLC) that will then be submitted to the US Copyright Office. The selection committee members are Steve Bogard (NSAI), Rick Carnes (SGA), Lynn Gillespie Chater (SGA), Dallas Davidson (BMI), Chris DeStefano (NSAI), Bob DiPiero (BMI), Dan Foliart (ASCAP), Adam Gorgoni (SONA), Michelle Lewis (SONA) and Paul Williams (ASCAP).
 
 
DIRECT INQUIRIES TO:
Jennifer Turnbow
615-256-3364
jennifer@nashvillesongwriters.com

Dae Bogan Returns To UCLA Herb Alpert School Of Music To Teach Billboard-recognized Course

I am happy to announce that my UCLA top rated and Billboard recognized course on music entrepreneurship will return to UCLA Herb Alpert School of Music next quarter, Winter 2019.

Course Title: MSC IND 188: Music Industry Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Course Description: From digital-first record labels and music messaging apps to AR/VR (augmented reality / virtual reality) music experiences and blockchain-based music startups, entrepreneurs have been disrupting and innovating across the music industry since the launch of Napster in the early 2000’s.

In this course, you will learn and apply principles of entrepreneurship and fundamental business strategies to the music industry. We will analyze case studies and current events and participate in critical discussions around music industry entrepreneurship.

Course work will consist of developing business plans, workgroup labs, and building out infrastructure for start-ups that focus on technology and innovation in the music industry; all culminating in the pitch of a fictitious music industry company at the end of the quarter. You will also take away cautionary tales and lessons for success from founder stories presented by guest speakers of music industry start-ups and executives from established music industry companies.

Personal Note: I developed “Music Industry Entrepreneurship and Innovation” as a forward-thinking course which reflects the kind of entrepreneurial exploration we will do around new business models and emerging technologies (e.g. artificial intelligence in music composition, blockchain in music rights administration, cryptocurrency as royalty payments, augmented reality and mixed reality in music education, virtual reality in music experiences such as concerts, etc.). I’m looking forward to taking this journey with you starting January 2019.

Also Read: Billboard Highlights Dae Bogan’s Course At UCLA Herb Alpert School Of Music Among Its “15 Best Music Business Schools In 2017”

Student testimonials:

Without a doubt one of the most useful classes I have taken in my undergraduate career at UCLA. Professor Bogan has so much real world knowledge and knows how to convey that knowledge in a classroom setting immensely well. All the course material was invaluable to my progression and aspirations of being in the music industry. Every lecture was extremely well-prepared, with amazing guest speakers and information that I will be using for the rest of my life. Professor Bogan did a phenomenal job and I will be recommending this class to all my friends interested in music or starting their own company. Can’t say enough good things about this class. – Anonymous, Student Course Evaluation

Very strong thought person allows him to be a very quality, natural teacher and mentor. Very cool to learn from a self made millionaire. Very humble and engaging. Understands the value on unorthodox education. – Anonymous, Student Course Evaluation

Hello Dae,

Hope your week has been going well! I just wanted to thank you for an amazing quarter. I really learned a lot from you and would love to keep in touch in the future. The information I gained from your class will help me in developing my professional career in the music industry and I just wanted to let you know how much of an impact you’ve had on me. Thank you!

Best,
R.

Hello Professor,

Thank you so much for all the knowledge you have provided this year, I have profoundly enjoyed your class.
-M.

Hi Dae,

Thank you for everything this quarter.

Not only have I learned so much about the music industry and entrepreneurship skills from your class, but you also taught me how to value my time and sense of self highly. With these valuable tools and mindsets, I have started to believe in myself so much more and I have also set higher standards for my life with purpose, thanks to you.

I appreciate the active investment you put in our actual learning through outside resources and guests. This class was a special experience, which has honestly been very hard to find in many of my professors these four years.

[Omitted]

I wish you enormous success in your future! I hope to be there one day as well 🙂

Best Regards,
E.

Dear Professor Bogan,

Hope this email finds you well! [Omitted]

I was truly inspired by your entrepreneurship and knowledge. It is great to see someone that looks like me be passionate, knowledgeable, and successful in the music industry. I also am grateful for all of the tools you gave us to create our own businesses. The things we learned are truly priceless and will help us structure our ideas and concepts for a lifetime. Moreover, thank you for the diverse array of music industry professionals you brought into the class, because of the depth of your network, you connected us with someone from just about every aspect of the industry, which gave me personal accounts of what is needed to get into this industry. I can tell that you carefully craft every aspect of your class, and I truly appreciate the effort and dedication to student learning.

[Omitted]

Not a goodbye, but definitely see you later! Thanks for a great quarter!

Best,
S.

Hi Dae,

Just wanted to thank you for an awesome class. This was one of the few classes at UCLA where I felt I was taught skills, not just about the subject matter but in how to go about achieving my career goals, that were applicable to my endeavors and will be used for the rest of my life.
I got more out of it than I had with any other course here and I would highly recommend your class to to anyone interested in a music industry career.

See you around hopefully,
A.

 

A Curated List Of My Thoughts On The Music Modernization Act (And Related Topics)

music-modernization-act

I am a very vocal music creators’ rights advocate and copyright purist. Often, I have the opportunity to share my *opinions* on topics within and circling the music industry that impact the ways in which music creators — especially DIY musicians — navigate and thrive in the United States.

Over the last ten months I have been especially vocal about the Music Modernization Act. I’ve been quoted in Billboard, Rolling Stone, Pitchfork and Digital Media News. I’ve been invited to panel discussions at music industry conferences and keynotes at universities. And I have written several think pieces (and rants) on the bill, which is now law, and related issues.

Still, I am asked what my thoughts are on the MMA.

I’ll summarize my thoughts by saying that I believe the intent of the MMA is good and admirable on its surface — that is, to improve the way rightsholders are accounted to and paid for the use of their music. I believe there is some good stuff in the MMA; particularly, the entirety of Title 2 (The CLASSICS Act) and Title 3 (The AMP Act). However, I feel that there is still work to be done. I also feel that some compromises, at the expense of DIY music creators, were made too easily (this is partially based on private discussions that I’ve had with individuals with privileged knowledge of the negotiations and dealings that took place during the drafting and subsequent amending of the MMA). That being said, I also believe that the soon to be formed Mechanical Licensing Collective has the opportunity to prove to songwriters that this law was truly about them.

Only time will tell.

Here’s a 2018 curated list of my “thoughts” on the Music Modernization Act (and related topics):

  • (Oct 16, 2018) Here Are 10 Ways That The Music Licensing Collective (MLC) Can Set The Bar As A Collective Licensing Organization In The 21st Century – https://bit.ly/2RW9kW2
  • (Sep 14th, 2018 in Pitchfork) Why So Many Hip-Hop Producers Are Putting Business Before Beats – https://bit.ly/2PEsi1x
  • (Aug 19th, 2018) Another Music Modernization Act Opinion Piece – https://bit.ly/2NLp9LC
  • (Aug 15th, 2018 in Rolling Stone) Why More Pop Songwriters Are Stepping Into the Spotlight – https://bit.ly/2ClAuAc
  • (Jul 24th, 2018) Songwriters Are Owed Nearly $2B In Unclaimed Royalties!!! — Maybe More — I’ve Been Saying This For Some Time Now (Against Pushback), But Finally The Press Has Confirmed It – https://bit.ly/2CMR6Sp
  • (May 15th, 2018 in Billboard) Black Box Royalties Myths, Common Misconceptions Debunked at Music Biz 2018 – https://bit.ly/2q4dhLD
  • (May 7th, 2018 in Digital Music News) Is the Music Modernization Act Enabling ‘Legal Theft’ Against Smaller Artists? – https://bit.ly/2IugrCS
  • (Apr 25th, 2018) 5 Ways The Music Modernization Act Could Be Fairer To ALL Music Creators – https://bit.ly/2Jzn1tb
  • (Apr 20th, 2018) I Was Interviewed By The Congressional Budget Office Regarding The Music Modernization Act, And Now I’m Even More Concerned For DIY Musicians – https://bit.ly/2AdwpN0
  • (Jan 17th, 2018) – My Thoughts On The MMA In Light Of The CRB Mechanical License Rate Decision – https://bit.ly/2P6bT98

Where do you stand on the MMA?

Here Are 10 Ways That The Music Licensing Collective (MLC) Can Set The Bar As A Collective Licensing Organization In The 21st Century

music licensing collective dae bogan

If you work in the music industry and own a radio, TV, smartphone, or computer then you’ve probably already heard that the The Orrin G. Hatch–Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (MMA) has been signed into law. At this point, every major music rights organization has published their praise of the legislation, which will create a blanket streaming mechanical license for Spotify, Apple, Amazon, Google, Tidal, and other on-demand music streaming companies; bring pre-1972 sound recordings under federal copyright protection and open up a flow of royalties from digital services to the artists (or their estates) and copyright owners of those recordings; and codify an allocation of digital radio royalties to music producers.

Title 1 of the MMA, also called Music Modernization Act, sets out  provisions and guidance for the formation of a collective mechanical licensing body to be called the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC). The MLC will administer a safe harbor blanket license for the streaming of musical works, collect licensee fees from licensees, prepare and remit statements of earnings to songwriters and music publishers, and make royalty payments to the same.

The MLC will join the ranks of SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC in the sense that it will become a powerful representative of the collective rights of thousands of music creators and rights-holders in the United States. However, unlike its counterparts, the MLC will be born in the 21st century. And as a 21st century collective licensing organization, the MLC has the unique opportunity to implement, at inception, 21st century business practices utilizing 21st century best practices and technologies.

Here are 10 ways that the Mechanical Licensing Collective can set the bar as a 21st century collective licensing organization:
 
1.) Provide its members with a data BI (business intelligence) dashboard to better visualize their mechanical royalties data and dive deeper into their statements. The dashboard could enable forecasting based on projected streaming activity (maybe offer scenario planning, which makes it possible to attract loans against future royalties). They could ingest data from a service like BuzzAngle to offer estimated royalty accrual in real-time so that members who are artists can see the net effect of playlist streaming campaigns on their bottom line and choose to invest more into campaigns in virtual real-time.
 
2.) Maintain a public and accessible unclaimed royalties database. Deploy artificial intelligence to evaluate unmatched usage reports as opposed to relying solely on exact name and ISWC matches. And expand the statute of limitations on unclaimed royalties to 10 years
 
3.) Require DSPs who take advantage of the safe harbor streaming mechanical license to recommend (and provide guidance) to aggregators and labels to provide composition ownership information in their metadata when uploading releases to the DSP. This can be done with custom parameters in DDEX ERN or via the new DDEX MWN (Musical Works Ownership) message schema.
 
4.) Work with the U.S. Copyright Office to create an integrated musical works registrations process so that works are simultaneously registered with the MLC and LOC.
 
5.) Expand the statute of limitation period on unclaimed royalties to 10 years and hold funds in an interest-bearing escrow account from which 25% of the interest flows to the general fund of the MLC and 75% of the interest is paid to the payee, along with the balance of unpaid royalties, once the payee has come forward or have been found.
 
6.) Commission an annual audit and publish the findings to members.
 
7.) Use blockchain, where applicable.
 
8.) Remit statements and payments monthly when a member opts to receive direct deposits and electronic statements.
 
9.) Display assessed administration fees on royalty statements.
 
10.) Do not implement high usage weights or bonuses.

My Response To Ari Herstand’s Comments Regarding TuneRegistry

Tonight, I finally had time to read a recent piece by Ari Herstand in which he reviewed a Spotify playlist submission service called Playlist Push owned by an acquaintance of mine. It was a good piece because Ari spent time using the service and met with the founder to ask questions. His review was credible because he was knowledgeable. Like the good journalist that I generally respect him as, he did his research well.

However, I was taken aback when I clicked through to another article — on registering music with music rights organizations (an obvious interest of mine) — that was referenced in the Playlist Push article and came across a passage at the end where Ari precedes to pass judgment on my company, TuneRegistry, and tells his readers that he can’t recommend us. This was shocking and upsetting because, unlike his review of Playlist Push, Ari has not used TuneRegistry and has never set with me, the founder, to discuss what we do or ask questions (despite the fact that I have invited him to do so in the past). In fact, he states in what is basically a sort of rant against our model, that he has questions about our service.

Ari wrote,

Worth mentioning that TuneRegistry is a new company that was created to get your songs registered most places for a fee. They don’t take a commission, so they don’t really put much effort into tracking down your royalties, they just get your songs registered and hope that the appropriate organizations pay you correctly (but you are required to register yourself with all the organizations they collect from – which is a major headache and NOT recommended). TuneRegistry takes a lot more effort and hands on work by you, but they serve a purpose for those that have the time, energy and understanding of how all this works and want to manage it themselves (and keep all their royalties).

But, you do not need to use them. Let me repeat, you do NOT need to use TuneRegistry (I got some questions about this). I just listed them as an alternative to an admin publishing company. To be honest, I can’t recommend them because of the headaches they cause in making you register with all these orgs. But some people like headaches. So… go for it! I recommend giving up 15% to a full-fledged admin publishing company and saving yourself the headache.

In response, I left the following comment on the article so that readers of Ari’s piece would receive more context from me, the founder of TuneRegistry:

TuneRegistry founder here. I appreciate that Ari decided to mention us in this piece. He’s one of the champs out here providing information to independent artists. That being said, as a music creator rights’ advocate, speaker, writer, music business educator (https://daeboganmusic.com/category/educator), and former indie artist and music manager, I would like to add some context to our offering as a counter to the negative-leaning and misleading tone presented in the piece.

TuneRegistry is an affordable (two Starbucks coffees a month) software that empowers DIY music creators to administer the music rights that they own and control, while retaining 100% of their copyrights and 100% of their royalties. We enable both composition side and master side rights administration, all in one place.

Prior to launching TuneRegistry — which was co-founded by a music industry professional & educator, two lawyers, and a technologist…all of whom are also musicians — I spent 2 years working with all of the U.S. music rights organizations to get them onboard to allow self-published music creators to reap the benefits of being their own publisher. This means, you do not have to give up 20% of your publishing income in perpetuity (until you cancel) just because a 3rd party publishing administrator registered a song for you with a PRO one time several years ago.

Ari states that we “don’t take a commission, so they don’t really put much effort into tracking down your royalties, they just get your songs registered and hope that the appropriate organizations pay you correctly.” It is correct that we do not take a commission. 100% of the royalties flow to the rights-holder. The notion that we do not care about your royalty flow is grossly misleading. We care immensely about your ability to be accounted to and paid royalties. It is this fundamental idea, the creators should be paid all of what they are due, that is at the heart of TuneRegistry. We work with creators every single day to clear conflicts, disputes, push customer service inquiries at societies forward, and provide education on how royalties work and how to collect them (see our free ebook “The DIY Musician’s Starter Guide To Being Your Own Label & Publisher” https://www.tuneregistry.com/lp/the-diy-musicians-starter-guide-to-being-your-own-label-and-publisher). I personally spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours in the music industry, at conferences and meeting with organizations and societies to improve outcomes for indies. In a word, we care. We are smaller than all of the traditional publishing administration companies that Ari mentioned in his piece, some of whom boast about having over 150,000 songwriters in their catalog. Without disparaging any of them, I will say that it is impossible to actively “track down” royalties for 150,000 songwriters. Passively receiving royalty payments and unauditied royalty statements, is not the same as tracking down royalties, something that I’ve done with my other company RoyaltyClaim.com, the world’s first search engine for unclaimed royalties, but I’ll digress.

Ari also mentions that, “you are required to register yourself with all the organizations they collect from – which is a major headache and NOT recommended.” We do not collect from any organization at this time. Because you receive 100% of your royalties, you must go to the organization and create accounts to provide them with your banking information so that they can pay you. You must also create accounts so we have an account to register your music into from the TuneRegistry dashboard. This is a one-time thing for only up to 6 organizations. It literally takes an hour or two to submit the applications. This isn’t really that much of a headache. In my opinion, a much bigger headache is giving up 20% of your U.S. publishing royalties in perpetuity (until you cancel) to a 3rd party because you couldn’t put a few hours on a Saturday afternoon aside to get this done. You (the reader) should do the math and be the judge. Can you take out one afternoon to join a few U.S. music rights organizations and then keep 100% of your U.S. music royalties or are you too busy to complete a few forms and would therefore opt to give away 20% of your publishing income in perpetuity? Also, the notion that creating your own accounts is “not recommended” is a fallacy. Not only do all of the organizations encourage music creators to be proactive in their own rights administration, they actively suggest and educate you on how to do so. See this article (https://daeboganmusic.com/2018/03/12/how-to-apply-for-a-harry-fox-agency-online-account-as-a-diy-musician-a-step-by-step-guide/) that we wrote with the approval of Harry Fox Agency showing indie songwriters step-by-step how to get their own account and unlock their Spotify mechanical royalties, which we’ve been doing for some time now (including facilitating opt-ins into direct Facebook, Instagram, and Oculus licenses). Our free ebook mentioned above provides instructions on how to properly setup your own music rights company. We’ve helped many artists and managers do so, and they’ve written positive feedback from this guidance (https://twitter.com/MissAlexWhite/status/1044997438753435649?s=19).

Ari stated, “TuneRegistry takes a lot more effort and hands on work by you, but they serve a purpose for those that have the time, energy and understanding of how all this works and want to manage it themselves (and keep all their royalties).” Yes, we built TuneRegistry for music creators who care about knowing what’s going on with their music business, who care about the ownership and management of their catalogs, and who’d rather get paid all of their U.S. music publishing income faster (no 2 calendar quarters delay by a 3rd party administrator) by being paid directly from U.S. music rights organizations.

Ari writes, “But, you do not need to use them. Let me repeat, you do NOT need to use TuneRegistry.” Technically, you do NOT need to use anyone. This was a bit of an unnecessary statement. He continues, “I got some questions about this. I just listed them as an alternative to an admin publishing company. To be honest, I can’t recommend them because of the headaches they cause in making you register with all these orgs. But some people like headaches.” I would be happy to discuss. I’ve invited you to this discussion several times. You have my email. And please drop the “it’s a headache” bit. That is an incredibly subjective and unfair characterization of the process, by someone who has yet to go through it with us, no less.

Ari concludes, “I recommend giving up 15% to a full-fledged admin publishing company and saving yourself the headache.” To this I say, to each his own. I think there are great admin publishing companies out there doing great work. Many, however, do not accept DIY musicians. In fact, one stated this during his panel at Music Biz Expo this summer. An artist in the room asked what he should do since traditional publishing administrators would not represent his small catalog. The speaker said that artists will just have to wait until their careers grow. I stood up and rejected that notion and introduced TuneRegistry. I do not accept that music creators need to give away up to 20% of their U.S. publishing income. And we’ve been proving this with our users since we launched at SXSW in 2017.

In closing, Ari I appreciate your desire and work to spread information to music creators. Many look to you for advice, insight, and truth. As a writer or contributing journalist myself, I respect your usual research-driven evaluations of services and resources. However, I don’t think you gave us a fair review here since you’ve neither used TuneRegistry nor set down with me to talk about what we’re doing or how. Since you chose to mention my company in your article, a company that my team and I spend and sacrifice so much time and resources to help hundreds of DIY music creators, I would like to invite you, again, to have a discussion with me so that you can get a demo and ask any questions that you may have.

– Dae Bogan
Co-founder & Chief Executive Officer, TuneRegistry
Lecturer of Musicology, UCLA Herb Alpert School of Music

Music 2020: The Next Era of Innovation in the Music Industry

43586898_10156147778506656_4637030671980691456_o

Wednesday night, at California State University – Northridge (CSUN), I conducted my latest workshop, “Music 2020: The Next Era of Innovation in the Music Industry,” in Professor Andrew L. Surmani’s class for his M.A., Music Industry Administration students.

In this workshop, we explore the art and process of ideation; discuss the differences between invention, disruption, and innovation; and profile a number of developing innovations within the music industry including augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), mixed reality (MR), artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), blockchain and crypotcurrency. The presentation ends with a design thinking exercise where students break out into groups to work through the fundamental design thinking process of developing a minimum viable product to solve a vetted problem in the music industry.

The students seemed to like the workshop:

Dae, you were fantastic and the CSUN MIA students thoroughly enjoyed your very organized, insightful and forward thinking presentation. That was evident in the line of students waiting to talk to you at the break. Thank you again for coming to talk to our graduate music industry students.

– Andrew Surmani, Associate Professor of Music Industry Studies, California State University – Northridge


I’m looking forward to conducting this workshop next week at the College of the Canyons.

How Blockchain And Cryptocurrency Can Speed Up Spotify International Publishing Royalty Payments To US Songwriters

cryptocurrency and music

There’s been a lot of talk about applications of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency payments in the music industry. In fact, there isn’t a single major music industry conference that doesn’t dedicate some programming to related topics. There are several projects and startups currently underway to address licensing, discovery, attribution, remuneration and more with blockchain, smart contracts, and cryptocurrency.

For those of us who aren’t blockchain developers, simply keeping up with the many applications of blockchain in the music industry is the closest we’ll get actually knowing how this all (could) works.

I’ve been thinking about how blockchain and cryptocurrency could speed up the process of paying U.S. songwriters, who wait upwards of 1.5 years to get paid for the use of their songs on Spotify outside the U.S.

The current state of the flow of international publishing income to U.S. Independent Songwriters who own their publishing and use traditional publishing administrators to collect in the U.S. is quite depressing.

As an example, Tommy released a song on Spotify in January 2018. In the United Kingdom, the song earned $100 “publisher share” Spotify UK digital public performance royalties.

Here’s the breakdown:

START: $100 “publisher share” of Spotify UK digital performance royalties in January 2018.

1. PRS collects Tommy’s publishing income in the UK ($100) in January 2018.

2. PRS retains 10% admin fee and remits the balance ($90) to ASCAP in October 2018.

3. ASCAP retains 12% admin fee and remits the balance ($79.20) to the Publishing Administrator in February 2019.

4. Publishing Administrator retains 20% admin fee and pays Tommy ($63.36) in July 2019.

END: Tommy is paid $63.36 for his Spotify UK “publisher share” income (earned $100) after waiting 1.5 years and experiencing a reduction of 37% of his royalties. Imagine $1,000 reduced to $633.60 or $10,000 reduced to $6,336.00.

Had Spotify used blockchain technology to dynamically identify Tommy as the rightsholder in his song and paid him instantly at the close of the month with cryptocurrency, Tommy would have already spent his $100 on studio time!

%d bloggers like this: