Spotify offers undiscovered artists less than Youtube does. It’s basically a subscription-based Myspace Music, where if they surf your genre or know your name they might find you. The only difference is that Myspace is free and doesn’t run audio ads that cut into your listening time.

There is a good reason that file-sharing will not be akin to jay walking: file-sharing as viewed by law infringes upon the rights of others. If the law is to accept copyright then it must at least attempt to combat infringement.

Realistically I see CC works existing along side a shortened copyright lifespan in the ballpark of 10-25 years before being freely shareable for non-commercial use.

Well said. I don’t even think the percentage would be a problem in and of itself (just look at how excited artists are to Tunecore their way onto Itunes), but the system in place that makes it difficult for fans to send money your way.

Spot on. Being an administrator myself I’m fully aware of how any system will grow unchecked barring active countermeasures against such growth. In the end the system itself costs more overhead than it will facilitate and starts breaking down.

And that’s when we get self-serving administrative bureaucracies like Copyswede, STIM, and PRO. Whatever nation they’re in they share the same function.

Peter Sunde’s “Flattr” system was a good move – unfortunately I think it’s a proof-of-concept and nothing more until we actually get a universal internet currency – bitcoin or something else with the same characteristic.

As is, it’s far harder than it should be to simply open your wallet and take out some spare change. If every musician could be busking on every “street corner” in the world just by using the internet we’d be looking at a few rather wealthy great artists. Right now that wonderful idea gets blocked by middlemen trying to grab themselves a hefty piece of the transaction and in the process making the transaction too hard for the average guy to put up with.