I firmly believe artists should be paid for what they create.
We are passionate about making it so that users enjoy the music that they want to enjoy but at the same time fairly compensates artists. That's not the same as saving the music industry.
The last thing we want is for radio to say that they can't afford to play our artists and turn off the pipe.
I think it would be bad for culture and the art if artists and people who develop the apparatus to support those artists don't get paid.
Companies like Spotify, the new Apple service, and all the others are really going to have to pay artists more. And I think it's a matter of time; I think a lot of these companies and the individuals that are involved in them realize that as well. They know that artists are not getting what they should be getting.
A group or an artist shouldn't get his money until his boss gets his.
Singer/songwriters spend two or three years making an album, and then it goes up for sale and everybody pirates it and you don't make any money. Whereas, writing a film score you still get presented with a paycheck.
First of all, I only get 50 percent of it, because, I mean, the galleries get 50 and 60 percent. I mean, that's normal. I understand that. I don't quarrel with that.
With Spotify and all those streaming services, you don't get paid anything. You have to be, like, Madonna or something to actually make a real royalty from that.
It's very hard for an artist to negotiate their fees. My job is to act; my manager's job should be to handle the business side of it.
I'm an entertainer, and I'm paid as an entertainer.
Our label is very digital-friendly. We try to provide some free stuff to get interest in the band, but we have to pay our artists. They have to get paid.
I think that once an artist has proven herself and you sell lots of records, you should be compensated.
I didn't even know for years that people ever even got paid for this, because they don't teach you that in school. They don't say Shakespeare got a check.
My idea is that artists should make their music available for free, and fans should only pay for it if they really like it.
If you get 100 million streams on a song and you're only being paid on 20 percent, the check's not going to look good. The money's not going to look fair.
Let us be clear: I take ten times more money for a concert than for an opera performance.
Music is everywhere - you consume it every day, everywhere you go. The content creator should be compensated. It's only fair.
The economics of theater are painful. I still think that the theater community should be looking much more rigorously at how to let the playwright keep the money they make.
But as a writer and performer, I want to get paid for what I do.
If the studios paid the artists, how would they ever be able to afford the executives?
My features & my shows 10 times your pay 50k for a verse no album out
Composers are in some ways the last frontier of musician that gets a paycheck for their musical services.
If you're an artist, and you put out a record - most artists only have one or two hit records - that has 100 million streams, on certain services you only get paid on 75% of those streams. How's an artist going to live like that?
