fair music - Interview with Sabine Reiter
Culture and Development
fair music - the initiative for fairness and justice in the music industry
Interview with Sabine Reiter (mica - music austria)
Sabine Reiter, executive director of mica - music austria, is responsible for the fair music initiative, which stands up for fairness and justice in the music industry. Yvonne Gimpel (Austrian Commission for UNESCO) spoke to her about goals, intentions and potentials of the international initiative.
When you hear "fair music", you almost immediately think of "fair trade". Is this association justified? What are the similarities and what are the differences?
The similarity is of course intentional. The goal of fair music is to offer standardized contracts along the lines of fair trade , which allow signatories to use the fair music seal for the respective product or service.
The initiative was launched as a campaign in 2006. The initial intention was to make music consumers aware of the fact that fairness in the music business cannot be taken for granted. Since 2009, fair music is an EU project. The specific objective of the project is to create an agency and distribution channels following the example of fair trade.
However, there are major differences compared with fair trade. Bananas are after all bananas, I can buy bananas, either with or without the fair trade label. As a conscious citizen, I would tend to buy bananas with a seal, even though the banana tastes just like those without a seal. This of course does not work the same way in music. I only get one certain CD or song that I like, with or without a seal. There are only certain labels willing to certify their contracts by fair music. This is a substantial difference to fair trade, which of course has an impact on the market opportunities for such an initiative. At the moment there is a particular concern to interest as many labels as possiblie for the idea.
fair music focuses on minimum legal standards in contracts. Why is the emphasis of this legal dimension for "fair music" necessary, is this not adequately protected by existing law?
To a large extent, the music market is determined by an imbalanced situation between the parties. Economically experienced music business entrepreneurs are accompanied by inexperienced musicians. The situation can be compared to the relationship between entrepreneur - consumer or employer - employee . While the legislature intervenes and protects the last two mentioned examples, this protection is often completely missing in the music scene. The result is that the conditions of the music contracts are mostly in favor of the music contractor. Naturally, the advantage of the one leads to the disadvantage of the other. For example, whereas in the comprehensive music contracts, the obligations of the musician are listed in detail, we search in vain for obligations of the music entrepreneur, for instance when recording contracts do not obligate the label to actually release the record.
In addition, the power exchange between the contractor and musician involves a complex matter. On the one hand, the musician provides intangible products (copyright, performance rights, merchandising rights), on the other hand, the accomplishments of the music entrepreneur is determined by complex methods of license fee calculations. The contract model of the music entrepreneur, which often reflects decades of contract practice, is also sometimes hard to understand and contradictory, even for a specialist.
This is the point where the fair music initiative sets in: The music entrepreneur should be encouraged to act fairly. While the copyright legislation is designed to correct the worst excesses, fair music aims at establishing balanced contractual conditions and a fair cooperative approach in the music market.
The subject of "rights" or to be more exact "copyrights" is very controversial in the public arena - especially when it comes to online music. To settle a concept of "fair" within this debate appears to be a delicate matter. How is "fair" defined and who defines it?
Especially in terms of online music, we see opportunities for the project to position fair music as an alternative model in the debate between flat rate and tightening of copyright protection. We assume that buyers who can be sure that musicians are paid fairly, will be more willing to pay for something online.
As for the notion of fairness, it is only possible to orientate oneself to fair trade up to a certain extent. Just as fair trade, fair music is all about strengthening the weaker partner in the contract. In most cases these are the musicians, but regarding contracts with online platforms these are also labels or aggregators.
In the music area, it is considerably more difficult to create a balance. First, it is not just about fair pay alone, but also about the transfer of various rights. Also, the same term in a contract with a certain label can have a different meaning than with another label, simply because their services are different. An example: If an artist or band take-over agreement is linked to a publishing contract, this can be disastrous if the label runs this publishing company as an alibi to earn on the royalties of the musicians, but it could also be a great working publishing company.
It is very difficult to tar them all with the same brush. To create standards that are as realistic as possible, we continually conduct consultations with musicians and labels.
In addition to contractual standards for the album production, for physical products and online music, we are working on standards for online distribution and live concerts.
To which extent is it possible and feasible for "fair music" as an EU project to define and enforce common standards for the entire EU area - after all an area with over 500 Million inhabitants, different economic situations, price levels and purchasing power differences, divergent legal traditions (eg UK) or structures and modes of interest representation?
Our current consulting activities, which also include international treaties, has shown us that the international regulatory mechanisms of music contracts are basically designed the same. But I do not deny that there are different laws in different countries. Fair music makes no reference to laws, but sets in at the private autonomy of contracts between the parties. These should be designed in a cooperative and fair manner. Therefore, these standards are not affected by divergent legal traditions. We are pleased if a standard in a country is intended by law or is already a standard.
A fair contract means a fair share in the financial success for musicians. As to the question of purchasing power and the price differences, then, of course, only the actual revenues can be shared. In the course of the (minimum) percentage holdings, purchasing power and price differentials are already balanced, so there is no reason to take this into consideration.
Different structures and modes of interest representation in the countries, again, have no affect on the contractual relationships.
A central concern of the UNESCO Convention 2005 is the creation of a beneficial environment for artistic and cultural activity. One focus of the Convention, in particular, applies to the cooperation for the benefit of arts and cultural professionals from developing countries. Are there any ambitions to involve "fair music" in the context of development politics?
We definitely see the need for fair music standards in developing countries, and particularly a need for creating new distribution channels by fair music. An important goal of the initiative is to also make the global music market accessible to musicians from underprivileged countries.
In addition, there are more market opportunities opening up here for the initiative fair music than in the developed world. Consumers associate fair trade more with people from developing countries. On the contrary, Western pop music is more associated with stars than with musicians who need the support of such an initiative. That is why we strive to particularly support musicians and labels in the world music scene.
The project funding of the European Union ends in the course of 2011. What goals have been achieved up to now, what are the upcoming stages, and what will happen after 2011?
We have a draft of the business model of the agency and the drafts of the three aforementioned standards. Until the end of the project, our goal is to publish a first version of the three standards. We are also in negotiations with various suppliers of distribution channels for certified music.
The initiative's own "fair music shelves" in online stores and physical record stores, would be an important prerequisite for a successful agency. An online distribution channel for music is already waiting on the website of mica - music austria, it only has to be filled with certified music.
There is also the site www.fairmusic.net and a biweekly newsletter, where we report on project progress and reflect the political conditions of musical life and the subject of fairness in the music world. It has already been managed to put the issue of fairness in the music business on the agenda of many international organizations, associations, as well as entrepreneurs, labels and musicians themselves.
We would be very happy if we could find future sponsors until the end of the project. Such an agency would by far exceed the resources of our music information center. But there are already talks with possible partners.
A look into the future, a request to Santa: To establish the vision of "fairness and justice in the music industry" beyond the project: What would it take and which protagonists would be required?
As to fairness and justice in the music business, we particularly see opportunities for a global improvement of the situation in initiatives such as ours. However, only a financially strong, global campaign would have the chance to raise a real awareness of this problem. Of course, this depends on people who love listening to music and who are the most important decision makers as consumers.
Thank you for your time.
