Business
Page: 400
Will Ward‘s global management, production, publishing and business development company Fourward has now launched a record label, Billboard can reveal. Dubbed Fourward Records, the label has already signed buzzy folk-pop artist Brenn! under a licensing and partnership agreement with Justin Lubliner‘s Dark Room imprint (via Interscope Records), as well as indie-rock band Sarah and the […]
Plans change. Dinner, vacation, date night… leadership transitions at music companies. BMG announced Wednesday it is shortening its long-term succession plan for longtime CEO Hartwig Masuch, with Thomas Coesfeld, the company’s chief financial officer, assuming the role July 1 instead of New Year’s Day.
The Bertelsmann-owned company said Masuch is leaving “at his own request and on the best of mutual terms,” with the longtime CEO explaining the handover between Coesfeld and himself has “gone so smoothly” that he decided to move up his exit date by six months. (In January, Masuch, 69, explained that he wanted to retire before turning 70.)
Masuch will remain in an advisory role after the transition until 2026, the company said.
“Hartwig has written many chapters in BMG’s success story, which Thomas will now continue,” said Bertelsmann CEO Thomas Rabe in making the updated announcement, adding that “as CFO, he got to know BMG well, drove forward its digital orientation, and invested considerable funds in the acquisition of music rights. I am certain that BMG will continue to grow under [his] leadership.”
Coesfeld was named deputy CFO at BMG in October 2021 before taking over as CFO the following spring. He previously served as chief strategy officer on the executive committee of the Bertelsmann Printing Group, a division of BMG’s parent company Bertelsmann. He began his career in 2014 as a management consultant at McKinsey in Munich.
Upon taking the top office at BMG, Coesfeld will also become a member of Bertelsmann’s Group Management Committee (GMC), which advises the Group Executive Board.
Replacing Coesfeld as CFO will be Mathis Wolter, who joins from Bertelsmann-owned RTL Group, where he has been senior vice president of controlling and investment for over three years. Prior to that, Coesfeld was svp of controlling and reporting at BMG. Joining Coesfeld and Wolter on the BMG Executive Board will be Sebastian Hentzschel (promoted from chief technology officer to chief operations officer), Dominique Casimir (chief content officer) and Nikola Holle-Spiegel (chief human resources officer).
Also joining BMG’s top management team is Alberto Chullen Llamas, arriving from Bertelsmann Education Group to be executive vp of investments to focus on future catalog acquisitions at the label. “After 45 acquisitions in 2022 alone, acquisitions remain central to BMG’s growth into 2023 and beyond,” said Coesfeld. “We are delighted to have secured the services of such a heavy-hitter as Alberto from within the Bertelsmann family, and one who knows BMG well.”
Coesfeld added, “We have a strong team at the helm of BMG… Together we will drive the company’s progress, and I very much look forward to working with them all. I would like to thank Hartwig Masuch for handing over a company which is both highly creative and successful. Hartwig’s clear focus on building a company which works for artists and songwriters has resulted in a globally relevant music company which has redefined what a music company can be in the streaming age.”
Hartwig Masuch
Barbara Dietl
Masuch joined Bertelsmann in 1991, overseeing Germany, Switzerland and Austria as part of BMG Music Publishing’s first incarnation. In 2008, he advised Bertelsmann when the company sold its share of Sony BMG Music Entertainment to Sony in 2008, and soon, helped start BMG Rights Management — which later became BMG.
Under Masuch’s leadership, BMG has grown to be the fourth-biggest recorded music and publishing company in terms of revenue, trailing only the three majors.
In March, the label and publisher reported that it generated 866 million euros ($912.6 million) in 2022 compared to 663 million euros in 2021 ($784 million) — an increase of 30% year-over-year. The company’s publishing division, which makes up 60% of BMG’s revenues, grew by 26% to 518 million euros ($546 million) on new hits by Bebe Rexha and Lewis Capaldi, and catalog works by Blondie and Nirvana.
In recent years, BMG has acquired music rights from The Pointer Sisters, Peter Frampton, Harry Nilsson, Simple Minds, Tina Turner and Mötley Crüe, among others, and through a partnership with KKR the company has acquired catalogs from John Legend and ZZ Top. On the label side, BMG has signed Duran Duran, Santana, Bryan Adams, Maxwell and Louis Tomlinson. BMG has also moved into the live business, first by acquiring a majority stake in German live music promoter Undercover GmbH in 2020 and later with a similar alliance with KARO Konzert-Agentur Rothenburg GmbH, the organizer of the German Taubertal-Festival. The company also oversees Berlin’s historic 1,600-capacity Theater des Westens.
“BMG has set sales records in recent months, signed outstanding artists, acquired iconic music rights catalogs and developed new lines of business,” Hartwig said. “The values of transparency, service, and fairness are now an inseparable part of what has become the company’s DNA, much respected by the entire music industry. So I’m leaving on a high note – and in the firm conviction that with Thomas Coesfeld and his management team, a new generation will successfully lead the music company into a new era.”
The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) has notified radio and podcast giant Audacy of its plan to delist the company’s Class A common stock from the exchange over its consistently low share price, Audacy announced Tuesday (May 16).
According to a press release, “the NYSE will consider commencing delisting procedures when a company’s listed securities experience an abnormally low selling price.” The NYSE abruptly halted trading of Audacy’s stock at 2 p.m. ET on Tuesday, when shares were trading for $.094 — down slightly from $.10 at the start of the day. The company’s share price is down nearly 63% since the beginning of the year.
NYSE rules require a minimum average closing price of $1 per share over 30 consecutive trading days, but Audacy’s share price hasn’t traded above that threshold since July 5, 2022.
The NYSE has applied to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to delist Audacy’s stock. While that process plays out, trading in the company’s common stock on the exchange will be suspended, though it can still be traded over the counter.
Audacy signaled its intent to appeal the delisting by filing a written request, which it is required to do within 10 days of receiving the delisting notice. If that appeal is successful, the stock may resume trading on the NYSE.
In a statement, Audacy president/CEO David J. Field said that while the company is “disappointed” in the NYSE’s decision, he is “hopeful” that Audacy stock will start trading on the exchange again later this year “as we execute our action plans which include a reverse stock split to satisfy NYSE rules, the continued execution of our liability management plans and working with our financial advisors to refinance our debt.”
Field also stated that the company is confident it “will benefit from a general market recovery and will be able to capitalize on our investments in strategic transformation that position Audacy well for the future.”
Radio companies have been slammed by an advertising slowdown since the second half of 2022, and Audacy has been particularly hard-hit. In its first-quarter earnings released Wednesday (May 10), the company’s net revenue of $259.6 million was down 5.7% year-over-year, while cash operating expenses were up 3%. Adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) was $3.5 million, compared to $26 million in the first quarter of 2022.
On a May 10 earnings call, Audacy CFO Richard Schmaeling noted that the company’s network advertising revenue fell 6% year-over-year due to inflation and rising interest rates (though its podcast advertising revenue was up 14%). He warned that advertising demand has “further softened” since the start of 2023 and added that “it could get worse before it gets better,” noting that the company “is continuing to work to accelerate revenue growth, develop and execute added cost reduction actions and to sell other noncore assets.”
“However,” Schmaeling continued, “these actions may not be sufficient to fully mitigate the impact of potential further advertising weakness.”
Ed Sheeran is on a legal winning streak.
Less than two weeks after the star singer won a blockbuster trial over whether his “Thinking Out Loud” infringed Marvin Gaye’s “Let’s Get It On,” a federal judge has dismissed a second, closely-related copyright case accusing him of copying the same iconic song.
U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton had ruled last fall that Sheeran would need to face a jury trial in the second case, just like he did in last month’s showdown in Manhattan federal court. But on Tuesday (May 16), the judge issued a surprise decision reversing himself and dismissing the case without a trial.
The reason? The judge said he could rule himself, without the help of a jury, that the combination of simple elements that Sheeran allegedly stole (a chord progression combined with a harmonic rhythm) was not unique enough to be covered by copyright law in the first place.
“It is an unassailable reality that the chord progression and harmonic rhythm in ‘Let’s Get It On’ are so commonplace, in isolation and in combination, that to protect their combination would give ‘Let’s Get It On’ an impermissible monopoly over a basic musical building block,” Judge Stanton wrote, echoing the arguments that Sheeran’s attorneys made throughout last month’s trial.
Sheeran has spent years defending himself over “Thinking Out Loud.” Though the song was a commercial and critical success — it hit No. 2 on the Hot 100 before winning a Grammy award for song of the year — critics and the public quickly noticed similarities with “Let’s Get It On,” with one reviewer calling it an “incredibly obvious successor” to Gaye’s famed slow jam.
Sheeran was first sued by the heirs of Ed Townsend, who co-wrote “Let’s Get It On” with Gaye. It was that long-running case that last month culminated in a high-profile trial in Lower Manhattan, which featured passionate arguments from both sides and saw the singer himself playing the guitar from the witness stand. On May 4, the jurors returned a verdict that Sheeran and his co-writer Amy Wadge had not infringed the earlier song, clearing the star of millions of dollars in potential damages.
But even following that verdict, Sheeran was still facing another case filed by Structured Asset Sales, an entity owned by industry executive David Pullman that owns a separate one-third stake in Townsend’s copyrights. Last October, Judge Stanton ruled in that case that the pop star would need to face a jury of his peers. The judge said there was “no bright-line rule” for deciding whether Gaye’s selection and arrangement of common musical elements were creative enough to warrant copyright protection.
But on Tuesday, less than two weeks after the big verdict in the other case, Judge Stanton made the rare legal decision to “reconsider” his own ruling to send the case to trial.
Among other things, the judge cited the fact that the same combination of chords and harmonic rhythm had appeared in at least four other songs before “Let’s Get It On” was even released, including “Get Off Of My Cloud” by The Rolling Stones and “Georgy Girl” by The Seekers.
“Multiple songwriters have combined the two commonplace elements in the same manner for years,” Judge Stanton wrote. “If their combination were protected and not freely available to songwriters, the goal of copyright law … would be thwarted.”
The judge also cited a recent ruling that dismissed a case against Donald Glover over the Childish Gambino song “This Is America” on similar legal grounds, suggesting that the decision had changed the case law on how federal courts assess such combinations of unprotectable elements.
“To prevent manifest injustice, defendants’ motion for reconsideration is granted,” Judge Stanton wrote. “The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case.”
In a statement to Billboard following the ruling, Sheeran’s lead attorney Donald S. Zakarin said his team and his client were “truly pleased” with the outcome: “Judge Stanton concluded that Ed Sheeran and Amy Wadge did not infringe, a conclusion consistent with the jury determination that Ed and Amy independently created Thinking Out Loud. This is an important victory not only for Ed and Amy and all songwriters but also for the music loving public.”
Though Tuesday’s ruling is a key victory for the pop star, it’s not the end of the road for the “Thinking Out Loud” litigation. Both the verdict earlier this month and the new ruling can still be appealed, which could take years to resolve. And Structured Asset Sales is also pursuing a third, more novel case based on a different copyright covering Gaye’s more famous recorded version of the song.
In an interview with Billboard following the ruling, Pullman said his company would appeal Tuesday’s decision on multiple grounds. And he stressed that he would continue to litigate the third case, which has been paused while the other cases played out.
“In the new case, in front of a different judge, we have the sound recording in that case,” Pullman said. “Through all these years of litigation, the one thing the defendants have been petrified of is the sound recording. They don’t want to play it for the jury, because then they would see the similarities.”
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: An ugly sexual assault lawsuit against country star Jimmie Allen; a potential agreement between record labels and streamers over AI-generated fake songs; allegations that NYPD cops stole pricey champagne from a music festival; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: Jimmie Allen Sexual Assault Lawsuit
Country music star Jimmie Allen was hit with a civil lawsuit last week containing some truly ugly accusations: That he had repeatedly sexually harassed and raped a woman on his management team, and that her company then fired her when she complained.
In a complaint filed in Tennessee federal court, the anonymous “Jane Doe” accuser alleged that Allen “manipulated and used his power” over her job as a day-to-day manager in order to “sexually harass and abuse her” over a period of 18 months from 2020 to 2022.
Months later, when she says she was “on the verge of a nervous breakdown and considered committing suicide” and chose to disclose the problem to her employers — management firm Wide Open Music and founder Ash Bowers — she says she was promptly fired in retaliation.
Allen denied any wrongdoing, admitting to a sexual relationship with his accuser but saying it had been consensual. Bowers, too, strongly refuted the claims — saying his company had quickly ended its relationship with Allen after learning of the relationship with his accuser
But the fallout was quick: Allen’s record label, BBR Music Group, announced hours later that it had suspended its work with the singer; the next day, his current management company, The Familie, and booking agency, UTA, both announced they were doing the same.
For more on the Jimmie Allen lawsuit, including access to the full legal documents filed in the case, go read our full story.
Other top stories…
MUSIC AI ON CAPITOL HILL – At a Senate hearing over potential regulation for artificial intelligence, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) grilled Sam Altman, CEO of the company behind ChatGPT, over AI’s impact on the music industry — including whether music AI platforms should pay artists whose works are used to train the machines. “There has to be compensation to that artist,” Blackburn told Altman.
A TAKEDOWN SYSTEM FOR AI? – The major labels are in talks with Spotify and other streamers to create an informal process to deal with AI-generated soundalikes, similar to last month’s infamous “Fake Drake” song. The proposed system would operate similarly to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s notice-and-takedown process but would cite name-and-likeness rights rather than federal copyrights.
MARILYN MANSON CASE GUTTED – A Los Angeles judge dismissed much of Marilyn Manson’s defamation lawsuit against his ex-fiance, Evan Rachel Wood, ruling that many of his claims were barred under a California law aimed at protecting free speech. Manson’s case claimed that Wood orchestrated a conspiracy of false abuse accusations to destroy his career.
ELECTRIC ZOO CHAMPAGNE HEIST – Three NYPD detectives were hit with criminal charges over allegations that they stole nearly $3,000 worth of Jay-Z’s Ace of Spades brand champagne from the VIP area during last year’s Electric Zoo festival.
TIDAL CASE DISMISSED – A judge tossed out a lawsuit against Jack Dorsey and his Block Inc. over its 2021 acquisition of majority ownership in Jay-Z’s Tidal. The court ruled that Dorsey and Block didn’t violate their fiduciary duty to investors even though they made a “terrible business decision” to buy the failing streamer — a decision made after Dorsey vacationed with Jay-Z in the Hamptons.
VILLAGE PEOPLE v. TRUMP – Disco legends Village People sent a cease-and-desist letter to Donald Trump, threatening legal action over a costume-clad tribute band at his Mar-a-Lago resort that’s allegedly been performing “Macho Man” and other hit songs without permission.
MOFI SETTLEMENT APPROVED – A federal judge greenlit a $25 million settlement struck by vinyl producer Mobile Fidelity to resolve accusations that the company’s pricey “all analog” records were secretly created using digital methods, overruling objections from some customers that the settlement was “tainted by the stink of collusion.”
LETS TRY THIS AGAIN – T.I. headed back to court for a second trial in his lawsuit claiming that toymaker MGA stole the design of its “OMG” dolls from the OMG Girlz — a defunct teen pop trio created by his wife, Tameka “Tiny” Harris. The new proceedings kicked off months after the first trial ended in an abrupt mistrial.
The three major label groups have been in talks with the big music streaming services to find a way to get them to remove recordings with AI-generated vocals created to sound like popular artists, Billboard has learned. The idea under discussion with Spotify, Apple Music and Amazon Music would operate much like the one laid out by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act but would cite violations of rights of publicity, rather than copyright, according to sources at all three majors. Unlike the DMCA, however, this arrangement appears to be voluntary.
The 1998 DMCA gives online services that use, store or transmit copyrighted works a “safe harbor” from secondary liability for copyright infringement as long as they abide by a notice-and-takedown system that allows rightsholders to ask them to remove copyrighted content. That law would not apply to most AI-generated soundalike tracks because they do not infringe protected elements of copyrighted recordings or compositions but rather a trademark or a right of publicity, the protection celebrities may be able to receive to protect their names and likenesses from unauthorized commercial exploitation.
Songs that imitate the voices of big-name talent have become a trend over the past month, reaching widespread attention in mid-April when the track “Heart on My Sleeve,” which apparently used AI to mimic the style and tone of vocals by Drake and The Weeknd, was uploaded to streaming services and then swiftly removed. (The song did not credit those artists, although they were referred to in social media posts about it.)
Citing rights of publicity can be more complicated than copyright, because they are matters of state law in the U.S., backed by limited legal precedent. Rights vary by state, protections for deceased artists vary even more widely, and the use of soundalike vocals for creative purposes may in some cases be protected as free speech. Further complicating matters, these rights almost always belong to artists, not labels, which would presumably file notices on their behalf with authorization. Right now, however, this is the most obvious legal argument with which to keep AI-generated soundalikes off major streaming platforms.
In an April 26 earnings call, UMG CEO and chairman Lucian Grainge seemed to signal this approach to investors. “The recent explosive development in generative AI will… create rights issues with respect to existing copyright law, in the US and other countries, as well as laws governing trademark, name and likeness, voice impersonation, and right of publicity,” he said. “Further, we have provisions in our commercial contracts that provide additional protections.” It is not clear if takedowns issued by the majors would rely on these provisions, state law, goodwill, or some combination.
Some executives have raised concerns that AI soundalikes that imitate the voices of popular artists could result in consumer confusion. Still, a few artists like Grimes and Holly Herndon have embraced the technology, training their own AI voice models and making them available to the public.
Meanwhile, companies like Uberduck, Supertone, Lingyin Engine, and Covers.ai are marketing models with which to replicate voices. Covers.ai, which launched last week, has said that it received over 100,000 sign-ups in anticipation. Tencent Music Entertainment executives announced in November that with the company’s Lingyin Engine they had created and released over 1,000 songs containing synthetic AI voices already, one of which amassed 100 million streams.
This stance taken by the leading streaming services counters a recent announcement from the blockchain-based music platform Audius, which announced that artists can now “opt-in” to allow AI-generated works on their artist page. To organize this new music and avoid confusion, Audius would create a separate tab on the artists’ page especially for user-generated content.
Representatives for Universal, Sony, Warner, Spotify, Apple Music and Amazon Music did not respond to requests for comment.
A U.S. senator representing Music City had tough questions about artificial intelligence’s impact on the music industry during a Congressional hearing on Tuesday, at one point asking the CEO of the company behind ChatGPT to commit to not using copyrighted songs to train future machines.
At a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee about potential regulation for AI, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) repeatedly grilled Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, over how songwriters and musical artists should be compensated when their works are used by AI companies.
Opening her questioning, Blackburn said she had used OpenAI’s Jukebox to create a song that mimicked Garth Brooks – and that she was clearly concerned about how the singer’s music and voice had been used to create such a tool.
“You’re training it on these copyrighted songs,” Blackburn told Altman. “How do you compensate the artist?”
“If I can go in and say ‘write me a song that sounds like Garth Brooks,’ and it takes part of an existing song, there has to be compensation to that artist for that utilization and that use,” Blackburn said. “If it was radio play, it would be there. If it was streaming, it would be there.”
At one point, Blackburn demanded a firm answer: “Can you commit, as you’ve done with consumer data, not to train [AI models] on artists’ and songwriters’ copyrighted works, or use their voices and their likenesses without first receiving their consent?”
Though Altman did not directly answer that question, he repeatedly told the senator that artists “deserve control” over how their copyrighted music and their voices were used by AI companies.
“We think that content creators need to benefit from this technology,” Altman told the committee. “Exactly what the economic model is, we’re still talking to artists and content owners about what they want. I think there’s a lot of ways this can happen. But very clearly, no matter what the law is, the right thing to do is to make sure people get significant upside benefit from this new technology.”
Blackburn’s questioning came amid a far broader discussion of the potential risks posed by AI, including existential threats to democracy, major harm to the labor market, and the widespread proliferation of misinformation. One witness, a New York University professor and expert in artificial intelligence, told the lawmakers that it poses problems “on a scale that humanity has not seen before.”
The music industry, too, is worried about AI-driven disruption. Last month, a new song featuring AI-generated fake vocals from Drake and The Weeknd went viral, underscoring growing concerns about AI’s impact on music and highlighting the legal uncertainties that surround it.
One of the biggest open questions is over whether copyrighted music can be used to train AI platforms – the process whereby machines “learn” to spit out new creations by ingesting millions of existing works. Major labels and other industry players have already said that such training is illegal, and cutting-edge litigation against the creators of such platforms could be coming soon.
At Tuesday’s hearing, in repeatedly asking Altman to weigh in on that question, Blackburn drew historical parallels to the last major technological disruption to wreak havoc on the music industry — a scenario that also posed novel legal and policy questions.
“We lived through Napster,” Blackburn said. “That was something that really cost a lot of artists a lot of money.”
Though he voiced support for compensation for artists, Altman did not get into specifics, saying that many industry stakeholders had “different opinions” on how creators should be paid. When Blackburn asked him if he thought the government should create an organization similar to SoundExchange – the group that collects certain blanket royalties for streaming – Altman said he wasn’t familiar with it.
“You’ve got your team behind you,” Blackburn said. “Get back to me on that.”
After sharing No. 1 with Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) for three consecutive quarters, Sony Music Publishing swept Billboard’s Publishers Quarterly report for the first 90 days of 2023 — including the country music category. The Weeknd’s “Die for You” and Miley Cyrus’ “Flowers” were the No. 1 songs on the Top Radio Airplay and Hot 100 publishers rankings, respectively, while SZA took top songwriter honors.
Sony’s 30.26% market share of the 100 Top Radio Airplay songs rose from 28.89% in the fourth quarter of 2022 and marked its eighth consecutive quarter in the No. 1 spot. The number of shares it held in songs on the ranking was also up quarter to quarter, from 64 to 66.
The publisher also finished at No. 1 on the Hot 100 publishers ranking, putting an end to UMPG’s remarkable three-consecutive-quarter streak at No. 1 with over 30% of the market — the first since that ranking was instituted in 2019. Sony returned to first place with a 30.56% share amassed from stakes in 67 songs, a huge gain over its No. 2 showing in the previous quarter, when it posted a 22.71% market share tied to shares in 58 tunes.
Sony also notched its third consecutive quarter as the No. 1 publisher on the Country Airplay list.
UMPG finished No. 2 on the Hot 100 ranking after its market share dropped from 31.63% to 23.45% quarter to quarter and its song count declined from 63 to 52. Compared with the previous year, however, UMPG’s first-quarter performance was up more than three percentage points.
Although the publisher remained firmly in second place on the Top Radio Airplay ranking, its market share fell from 25.66% in the fourth quarter of 2022 to 21.26% in the first quarter. Its share of songs also declined, from 52 to 48.
Warner Chappell Music finished third on both rankings and showed improved performance on each. The publisher scored a 20.71% market share on Top Radio Airplay — up almost five percentage points from the previous quarter’s 15.73% — and 21.73% on the Hot 100 ranking, up from 18.59% in the fourth quarter of 2022. Those gains came from shares in 52 and 47 songs, respectively.
The top songwriter across the board was Solána “SZA” Imani Rowe, who is published by UMPG. She co-wrote eight songs on the Hot 100 ranking and four on Top Radio Airplay. Her top song on both lists was “Kill Bill,” which is No. 2 on the Hot 100 ranking and No. 6 on Top Radio Airplay.
Kobalt held onto its No. 4 spot from the last quarter in both the Top Radio Airplay and Hot 100 rankings.
Despite holding steady, its market share fell from 10.38% in the fourth quarter to 8.72% in the first quarter’s Top Radio Airplay chart, although its share of songs almost doubled, including its top song, “Die For You.” On the Hot 100, Kobalt’s market share improved slightly by 9 basis points to 6.89% from the prior measurement period’s 6.8% and its song count grew to 26, including “Die For You,” from the fourth quarter’s 22 songs.
BMG’s No. 5 placement was due to a slight increase in its Radio Airplay market share, from 3.17% to 3.28% with shares in 11 songs — the same total from the previous quarter. On the flip side, BMG remained in sixth place for the second consecutive quarter on the Hot 100 ranking, even though its market share dropped from 2.38% to 2.13%. It also claimed shares of 8 songs in both quarters, while its top song on both charts for the first quarter was David Guetta and Bebe Rexha’s “I’m Good (Blue),”which was No. 4 on the Top Radio Airplay chart and No. 8 on the Hot 100 chart.
Pulse Music Group returned to the Radio Airplay rankings at No. 6 — after sitting out the fourth quarter. It posted a 1.69% market share from stakes in five songs, including its top track, “Flowers.” Prior to the fourth quarter, Pulse had placed in the Top Radio Airplay rankings for 12 consecutive quarters, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2019. On the Hot 100 publisher rankings, Pulse jumped five spots to No. 10 to No. 5 with a 2.28% share, more than doubling its No. 10 fourth quarter showing, 1.11%. Pulse’s song count doubled, too, from 3 songs in the prior quarter to 6 tunes in the first quarter.
S.I.A.E. Direzione’s Generale repeated its fourth quarter performance, finishing No. 7 on both charts with a 1.65% share, up from the prior quarter’s 1.38% on the Top Radio Airplay chart, and 1.35%, up from the previous quarter’s 1.24% share of the Hot 100 chart, when it was ranked No. 9. Its top song for both charts was also “I’m Good (Blue).”
Rounding out the Top 10 for the Top Radio Airplay rankings, Anthem, absent from the ranking since the second quarter of 2022, returned at No. 8 with a 1.47% share. Concord fell to No. 9 with a 1.41% share, down from the prior quarter’s No. 6 ranking and 2.19% share. And Hipgnosis Songs Group fell to No. 10 from its No.8 fourth-quarter finish, even though its market share improved to 1.40% from the prior period’s 1.29%.
On the Hot 100 ranking, Concord, Reservoir and Anthem all returned to the Top 10 ranking after not making the cut in the fourth quarter. Concord was only absent one quarter; the last time Reservoir made the ranking was the third quarter of 2021, and Anthem’s last time in the top 10 was the first quarter of 2022.
METHODOLOGY
*For the Top 10 Publishers Top Radio Airplay chart, percentage calculations were based upon the overall top 100 detecting songs from 2,941 U.S. radio stations electronically monitored by Mediabase (and provided through Luminate) 24 hours a day, seven days a week during the period of Dec. 30, 2022, to March 30, 2023. For the Top 10 Publishers Hot 100 Songs, percentage calculations were based upon the top 100 songs as ranked by Billboard Hot 100 points calculated from Luminate-compiled digital sales and streaming data and Mediabase-tracked radio airplay detections during the same period as above, reflecting the issue dates of Jan. 14, 2023, through April. 8, 2023. Publisher information for musical works on both charts has been identified by the Harry Fox Agency. A “publisher” is defined as an administrator, copyright owner and/or controlling party.
Apple Music wants to guide you to your next concert. On Tuesday (May 16), the platform launched a pair of new live music discovery tools intended to deliver users to global shows. The first of these tools lives on Apple Maps, where the service has launched guides for 14 global cities — Chicago, Detroit, Los […]
In 1994, at the dawn of the internet era, Rolling Stone asked Steve Jobs if he still had faith in technology. “It’s not a faith in technology,” he responded. “It’s faith in people.”
Today, at the dawn of the artificial intelligence era, we put our faith in people too.
It’s hard to think of an issue that has exploded onto the public scene with the furor of the debate over AI, which went from obscure technology journals to national morning shows practically overnight. This week, Congress is convening the first two of what will surely be many hearings on the issue, including one with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and another with musician, voice actor and SAG-AFTRA National Board member Dan Navarro.
As members of the global Human Artistry Campaign, made up of more than 100 organizations that represent a united, worldwide coalition of the creative arts, we welcome this open and active debate. It’s gratifying to see policymakers, industry, and our own creative community asking tough questions up front. It’s a lot easier to chart a course in advance than to play catch up from afterward.
We don’t have long to get this right, either. The internet is already awash in unlicensed and unethical “style” and “soundalike” tools that rip off the writing, voice, likeness and style of professional artists and songwriters without authorization or permission. Powerful new engines like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Jukebox, Google’s MusicLM and Microsoft’s AI-powered Bing have been trained on vast troves of musical compositions, lyrics, and sound recordings — as well as every other type of data and information available on the internet — without even the most basic transparency or disclosure, let alone consent from the creators whose work is being used. Songwriters, recording artists, and musicians today are literally being forced to compete against AI programs trained on copies of their own compositions and recordings.
RIAA Chairman/CEO Mitch Glazier
Othello Banaci
We strongly support AI that can be used to enhance art and stretch the potential of human creativity even further. Technology has always pushed art forward, and AI will be no different.
At the same time, however, human artistry must and will always remain at the core of genuine creation. The basis of creative expression is the sharing of lived experiences — an artist-to-audience/audience-to-artist connection that forms our culture and identity.
Without a rich supply of human-created works, there would be nothing on which to train AI in the first place. And if we don’t lay down a policy foundation now that respects, values and compensates the unique genius of human creators, we will end up in a cultural cul-de-sac, feeding AI-generated works back into the engines that produced them in a costly and ultimately empty race to the artistic bottom.
That policy foundation must start with the core value of consent. Use of copyrighted works to train or develop AI must be subject to free-market licensing and authorization from all rights holders. Creators and copyright owners must retain exclusive control over the ways their work is used. The moral invasion of AI engines that steal the core of a professional performer’s identity — the product of a lifetime’s hard work and dedication — without permission or pay cannot be tolerated.
David Israelite
Courtesy of NMPA
This will require AI developers to ensure copyrighted training inputs are approved and licensed, including those used by pre-trained AIs they employ. It means they need to keep thorough and transparent records of the creative works and likenesses used to train AI systems and how they were exploited. These obligations are nothing new, though — anyone who uses another creator’s work or a professional’s voice, image or likeness must already ensure they have the necessary rights and maintain the records to prove it.
Congress is right to bring in AI developers like Sam Altman to hear the technology community’s vision for the future of AI and explore the safeguards and guardrails the industry is relying on today. The issues around the rapid deployment of novel AI capabilities are numerous and profound: data privacy, deepfakes, bias and misinformation in training sets, job displacement and national security.
Creators will be watching and listening closely for concrete, meaningful commitments to the core principles of permission and fair market licensing that are necessary to sustain songwriters and recording artists and drive innovation.
We have already seen some of what AI can do. Now it falls to us to insist that it be done in ethical and lawful ways. Nothing short of our culture — and, over time, our very humanity — is at stake.
David Israelite is the President & CEO of the National Music Publishers’ Association. NMPA is the trade association representing American music publishers and their songwriting partners.
Mitch Glazier is chairman/CEO of the RIAA, the trade organization that supports and promotes the creative and financial vitality of the major recorded-music companies.