231
How are musicians supposed to survive on $0.00173 per stream?
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
231 points (95.3% liked)
Music
9917 readers
175 users here now
↳ Our family Communities:
➰#Music
Music.world - !music@lemmy.world
Jazz -!jazz@lemmy.world
Album Art Porn - !albumartporn@lemmy.world
Fake Album Covers - !fakealbumcovers@lemm.ee
Obscure Music - !ObscureMusic@lemm.ee
Vinyl and LP's - !vinyl@lemmy.world
Electronic Dance Music - !edm@reddthat.com
60's Music - !60smusic@lemmy.world
70's Music - !70smusic@lemmy.world
80's Music - !80smusic@lemmy.world
90's Music - !90smusic@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Actually while typing that out I thought more about the technical architecture of such distributed alternative streaming service that pays artists fairly, and it does sound like it could be fun to build.
But everyone in the fediverse already knows how difficult/impossible it is to get the average person to switch to open source software. It would most likely be a waste of time.
Here's a person who knows way more about the music industry than all of us in this thread out together. And he's thought a lot about this, too
Not so much the fediverse side of it, but the legal, and financial/jobs side of things.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Here's
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I don't think you can get people to agree on what's "fair" but it's always fun to think about. What would your fair payment scheme look like?