A2IM

Since January 2016, musicians who have struggled with the vagaries of compensation and regulation in their industry have been able to turn to one of their own for guidance, support and solidarity. That year, Richard James Burgess — who produced four top 20 U.K. hits for Spandau Ballet, managed bands, performed in one and oversaw business operations for Smithsonian Folkways Recordings — became president/ CEO of the American Association of Independent Music. 
Next January, Burgess will step down after leading the organization through what Louis Posen, founder of indie label Hopeless Records, describes as “a period of unprecedented growth.” Under Burgess’ purview, Posen says, “A2IM has expanded its membership, created more opportunities for members and launched signature events like Indie Week and the Libera Awards.” 

Trending on Billboard

During his 10 years at the helm of A2IM, Burgess also “built a highly engaged coalition of indie labels, large and small, and lobbied hard for them in Washington and across the music industry,” says Mark Jowett, co-founder and president of A&R at Nettwerk Music Group. “He fights each day for fairness and a level playing field,” adds Concord COO Victor Zaraya. “I will miss working with him.” 

Burgess says that his stint leading A2IM has been animated primarily by a single principle: “Do what’s best for the creators. It’s the music business. But without the music, there is no business.” 

Why did you decide it was time to move on from your role leading A2IM? 

I made up my mind when I started that 10 years would be my limit. Mostly my career has fallen into 10-year chunks by accident. I tend to get to a point where I feel like I’m repeating myself. I like to do new things. Also, I think it’s good for the organization to have new leadership. 

Over the decade that you’ve run A2IM, how has the definition of “independence” changed? 

It still means the same thing it always did. People get confused about what corporate structures do around independence as opposed to what independence means. It means that you own your own copyrights or you have the freedom to do things the way you want to do them. Most artists, if they have the option, decide to go independent rather than with a major because they can steer the direction of their career more. Majors have extremely high goals for sales, and that usually takes a lot of compliance with certain kinds of criteria. 

You don’t think that the major labels’ recent acquisitions of indies has changed the definition of independence? 

The question is, how much does corporate ownership affect your ability to do the things you want to do? I don’t think it’s a healthy universe where all independents are channeled through the majors. But this is not a new thing. There was a peak of independence in the late ’50s and early ’60s. 

There’s a long history of majors buying up indies, but is that happening at a different scale? Universal Music Group [UMG], for example, bought Downtown, which includes FUGA, which provides distribution for many  indie labels. 

That’s really upsetting a lot of independents. Having said that, there are options. Every time there’s consolidation, there’s a commensurate opening up of opportunities for new businesses and entrepreneurs. 

What do you see as the biggest wins during your time running A2IM? 

Coming in, I had several goals. One was to expand the organization, to make it more robust and as stable as possible. I think we’ve achieved that. Our revenues are much higher than they were. Indie Week is now a pretty established international conference. The other thing I’m really proud of is that we now are really established in advocacy. Nothing really happens in D.C. without us being involved. We get calls from congresspeople or their offices when there are any issues that might affect the sector, whereas we used to find out about it second- or third-hand or from the press that something was happening that could affect us. 

How were you able to bolster the organization’s advocacy operations?

I [previously] worked at the Smithsonian, so I was in the D.C. scene for years, and I had a lot of helpful insight when I came to [A2IM]. The first couple of years, we didn’t have any lobbyists. We had to scrape the money together to afford our current lobbyists. They do an amazing job, and they don’t kill us financially. But frankly, we can spend 10 times as much money on lobbying and we still would not match what our opponents spend. 

What are the priorities on the lobbying side?

We’re actually launching our own bills now. We have the HITS Act — that would let independent artists deduct up to $150,000 in music production expenses immediately. Another one is the American Music Fairness Act, which would make sure that artists could get paid from airplay. I’m really happy that songwriters get paid — this is not a zero-sum game. But radio stations are making money from selling ads against those records. Some of those ad dollars should go to the singers. 

Another bill we think is really important is the Protect Working Musicians Act, which we launched with the Artists Rights Alliance. It would allow small- and medium-size enterprises — could be an artist, could be a group of labels or publishers or songwriters — to collectively negotiate against much larger [digital service providers] and AI [artificial intelligence] companies. These are among the largest companies that have ever existed. The leverage they have is completely disproportionate. You look at the statements people like Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk are making, which is that [intellectual property] should be considered fair use. When you look at the profits Meta forecast the other day, it’s hard to see why the source material they use to fuel this tool should be free. Nothing else is free. The coding is not free. The storage is not free.

Where are you and the RIAA aligned, and where do you differ?

We’re in constant communication with the RIAA, and we’re aligned on a lot. They’re part of the musicFIRST Coalition [which aims to “end the broken status quo that allows AM/FM to use any song ever recorded without paying its performers a dime”]. There are some differences, but we are 100% aligned on the idea that we need to preserve and increase the value of music copyrights.

In 2023, UMG CEO Lucian Grainge said that while conflict in the music industry was once primarily between indies and majors, today’s divide is “those committed to investing in artists and artist development versus those committed to gaming the system through quantity over quality.” Do you agree?

In 1999, the music industry reached its peak. We’re still down from that in terms of adjusted dollars. And that’s not accounting for the additional usage these days — anecdotally, I think there’s a lot more music consumed today than there was in 1999. Simply because of phones and [earbuds], accessibility has vastly increased. The reason we’re in this position is because we don’t control our pricing or distribution anymore. We gave that up in 1999 when we let Napster slip through our fingers. That can’t happen again. Obviously, we’re not in an exactly parallel situation with AI as we were with the transition to digital. But I do think it’s the music industry and musicians versus the tech platforms. Tech platforms want to lower the cost of what they call “content” and I call “music.” The musicians and the labels want to increase the value. 

Are you taking any vacation after you officially step down?

I’m not good at vacation. A vacation to me is doing something different.