Viewing: Distribution - View all posts

AMAZON MUSIC OPENS UP STREAMING DATA WITH AMAZON MUSIC FOR ARTISTS APP 

AMAZON MUSIC OPENS UP STREAMING DATA WITH AMAZON MUSIC FOR ARTISTS APP

Here is some much needed good news for today! Amazon Music has announced the long-awaited beta launch of Amazon Music for Artists – a new mobile app for artists and their teams designed to help acts “better understand their business on Amazon Music”.

Guest post by Tim Ingham of Music Business Worldwide

The music streaming landscape just got more transparent.

Available on both iOS and Android, the app serves up information regarding artist streaming performance on Amazon Music’s various tiers, as well as insights into each act’s fanbase. 

According to Amazon, its features include: 

  • New success metrics, including the Daily Voice Index, which illustrates how an artist’s music is performing on Amazon Music with Alexa – including insights into voice requests by artist, album, song, and lyric. 
  • Access to near-real-time streaming data, providing artists with the latest streaming data across their entire catalog. 
  • A fan insights tab, which provides a breakdown of an artist’s most engaged listeners –Fans and Superfans – so they can focus on growing these segments over time. 
  • A custom date filter, so artists can choose specific dates, or length of time to track performance in near-real-time, including the last 24 hours of a release. 

CD Baby is a verification launch partner with Amazon Music for Artists, meaning any artist who is distributed through CD Baby can get expedited access to join.

The launch is coupled with a companion website (artists.amazonmusic.com) where artists and their teams can learn more about the app, as well as opportunity areas, best practices, additional resources, and more. 

In January, Amazon Music confirmed over 55m global ‘customers’ were now using the firm’s various tiers; this number included an estimated subscriber count of approximately 50m, up 16m year-on-year. 

Last August, Amazon Music rival Apple Music launched Apple Music for Artists, which in turn was designed to rival Spotify’s analytics tools. 

And in November, Universal Music Group revealed its own data/insights app. 

The Universal Music Artists (UMA) app can be used to view personalized, global data insights from Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon and YouTube (with data from Deezer set to be included in 2020). 

At launch, Amazon Music for Artists is available globally in English to download via the mobile app store on either Android or iOS

Tell @Spotify and @AmazonMusic to #StopFightingSongwriters 

Tell @Spotify and @AmazonMusic to #StopFightingSongwriters

Songwriters - You must develop and flex your music business muscles or you’ll continue to be pinned down by those who do not have your best interests at heart. On Instagram tell @Spotify and @AmazonMusic to #StopFightingSongwriters

50 Income Streams Music Creatives Should Know About - And Where to Find Them 

50 Income Streams Music Creatives Should Know About...And Where To Find Them 

Music royalties, licensing fees and the numerous other streams of revenue available to songwriters, performers and producers can be difficult to navigate. The good news is, the rapid growth of technology has produced more opportunities for distribution, new forms of music royalties and more ways than ever to track and collect monies due to you. The challenge is in knowing what types of royalties and fees are out there. 

In the world of music royalties, it all starts with the song. Each song is protected by copyrights in two categories: 

A copyright for the songwriting, or “composition”, categorized as the Composition 

A copyright for the performance, categorized as the Sound Recording. 

Depending on your role in the writing, production or recording of any given song, you may earn royalties in one copyright category or both. 

Beyond copyright royalties, there are a wide range of fees and profit centers that can encompass the earnings of a music professional. It is critical for creatives to be familiar with these revenue sources and have expert help whenever possible to track and collect the royalties, fees and income to which you are entitled. There is much to know, but there is also a wealth of information online, whether through sources like Wikipedia, official websites for Performing Rights Organizations (PROs) like ASCAP, BMI and SESAC, or right here, in this royalty income guide that Sound Royalties has put together for you. 

In the new digital music economy the creator is king. As an artist-friendly company, Sound Royalties is dedicated to the empowerment of creative talent. To help you flourish and sustain your career, here is our guide to royalty and revenue streams all music creatives should know about. 

Click here for a fantastic Income Stream resource from Sound Royalties!

Show Business is a Lot More Business Than Show - I Can Help 

Show Business is a Lot More Business Than Show - I Can Help

For most of us, making a full-time living making music is the goal. But in order to achieve this, it is essential to identify whether or not you're on the right track. 

As an exercise, think for a moment about why you're not currently making a full-time living making music... 

  • Do you know how to make a full-time living making music? 
  • Do you have a strategy for getting started and building a sustainable music career? 
  • Do you understand the different income streams available to you? 
  • Do you have a strategy for growing and nurturing a community of fans and followers? 
  • Do you have a strategy for monetizing your community? 
  • Are you marketing effectively? 
  • Do you have clarity about to whom you should be marketing and how? 

I would love to talk with you, hear your story, and help you move your career forward. If this sounds interesting to you, contact me today and let's create a plan to help you make a living making music.

Contact me today for a free no-obligation consultation.

Michael Pickering, M.A., Music Business, ACUE 

BERKLEE COLLEGE OF MUSIC 

Michael Pickering, President and Chief Creative Officer of Lionsong Entertainment, Inc., and former Director and founder of the Music and Entertainment Entrepreneurship program at the Community College of Aurora, is a creative leader, entrepreneur, educator, and musician. He holds a Master of Arts in Music Business Degree and a B.P.S. in Interdisciplinary Music Studies Degree from the Berklee College of Music. He has served on the boards of local arts and entertainment organizations, authored post-secondary music curricula, and spoken at many local and national music industry events. He also provides music and entertainment business and performance consulting services (www.mpickeringmusic.com). Michael and his wife, Amy Pickering, remain active as national headline music and clean comedy performing artists for corporate, theatrical, educational, outreach, cruise, and private clients worldwide — www.michaelandamy.com.

Could a Scalable Curation System be a Way Out of Our Industry’s Data Mess?  

Could a Scalable Curation System be a Way Out of Our Industry’s Data Mess?

It seems almost unimaginable that the problem of matching copyrights to copyright owners in order to enable accurate, streamlined, expedient, and reliable royalty payments to those to whom they are due is one of the largest problems facing the music industry in our current technologically advanced global community... until one begins to peel back the complex layers of historical lack of music industry record-keeping, incongruent global laws surrounding royalty issues, and the avarice-fueled corruption so prevalent in an industry that generates billions of dollars worldwide. Add to these issues the fact that there is little motivation from some organizations around the world that benefit financially by opposing solutions to the problem!

While many theories have been floated about how artificial intelligence and blockchain could be the cure for rights holders’ and creatives' financial woes, neither of these would untangle the industry’s rats nest of data, but a scalable curation system might. 

Could a scalable system offer a solution out of the music industry's data rat's nest? Could it be put in place in spite of those who would stand to lose ill-gotten gain so easily gleaned and hidden within the current mess? Check at this article by Vasja Veber, Co-Founder and Business Development Director for Viberate and let me know your thoughts.

Scalable Curation System Is Possible And A Way Out Of Our Industry’s Data Mess 

If you’ve talked to anyone in the music or entertainment space over the last ten years, you’re likely to have heard complaints and laments about the state of data in the industry. Though recording and composition metadata are often at the center of these woes in music–they are, after all, how creatives and rights holders get paid–other slices of the music business are faring even worse when it comes to data. 

There’s lots of gushing about everything from AI to blockchain, technologies that many of us take very seriously, but at the bottom of the problem is just one big, tough-to-untangle data mess. 

The nature of the mess may sound familiar to many outside of music and live entertainment. The data tend to be of very poor quality; you don’t actually know who came into your club or event, as ticketing information is appallingly inaccurate, for example. Data are very dispersed, scattered across socials, retail sites, streaming platforms, and other proprietary services. Worst of all for this machine learning-powered era, some of the early indicators of what’s going to be big–in the live music case, what’s taking off at certain small clubs, smaller tastemaker festivals, or key parties–may not be part of the mainstream data that’s easy to integrate via existing APIs. 

These issues find specific form in the music and entertainment industry, but have relevance to a wide range of businesses, from hospitality and event organizing to DTC and other data-reliant retail. And in live music, as in many other realms of commerce and marketing, addressing them demands a serious look at how to build a team to cultivate accurate information globally, which in turn requires a scalable approach that empowers individual data curators. 

To do anything with data, you have to find and refine the necessary sources for input, the data points that actually say something about the business, community, or scene. There are so many options out there in most cases that it’s tempting to rely on scraping plus a few APIs from relevant platforms. Another common approach is to simply set things up for crowdsourcing, and let the communities or customers fill in the data, yet that can quickly turn from exciting approach into moderation hell. Ideally, you want to combine a few firehose-like streams of data with important input from users who are incentivized to do a better-than-shoddy job at contributing information. In short, you need to tame what’s out there in the wild. 

Only humans can tame this wilderness and make it productive, people specially trained to weed out poor or irrelevant data. There’s too much complexity, nuance, and regional variation at this point to find automated solutions. That’s why we knew, as we tackled the data mess in our business, that we needed curators, real humans who knew what looked reasonable and what seemed off. Because we’re growing a large network of profiles, crossing the million mark recently, we also knew we needed enough humans to do the work well, and needed them to have certain knowledge and skills. 

These skills were determined by the focus we adopted early on. We knew that aiming to become something vague yet all-encompassing (“the Facebook for music,” as many startups liked to bandy around at some point) would make our site useless. Furthermore, we saw a massive gap in the live event realm. So we focused on live music and how other platforms and data points speak to live music scenes. There’s a lot to be said for niche approaches, and when you want to create industry-leading data, being a generalist isn’t necessarily a logical choice. 

In fact, our industry, like many others, has seen a proliferation of vanity metrics in the digital era, as well as metric fraud like purchasing, follows and streams. To counteract these forces, we homed in on unexpected metrics and data points that tell stories helpful to our clients and users, who range from fans to festival organizers and booking agents. For example, we surface which artists of note are following one another, something hard to figure out when scanning an artists’ thousands or millions of Twitter followers. This can show unanticipated connections and suggests potential collaborations and partnerships. 

We also made sure to solve one of the industry’s toughest data problems, by following one simple rule. One artist = one profile. It sounds ridiculously obvious, but even the world’s leading streaming platform doesn’t follow that rule. The only way to achieve that level of precision is by adding a human touch. A lot of times we have to defend our claim that we have one of the largest artist databases in the world, currently just shy of 500,000 profiles. We hear things like, “yeah, but I know this service that has 2 million.” They might claim this, but if you go to that particular service and type in “Tiesto”, you’ll get 10 or even more profiles for the same artist. From a data perspective, this renders such service useless, because having data scattered through multiple profiles for the same artist doesn’t let you engage in any kind of data-related analysis. It’s like one person having multiple social security numbers. 

Along with finding these simple, but hard-to-solve data pain points, we also looked for benchmarks and metrics that made sense to our community. For example, we realized that the price of a standard-sized beer was a great benchmark for the overall cost of a festival or venue, guiding music fans to find the right experience for their budgets and helping event operators see how they measure up to the competition. People note the cost of a pint, our curators validate it, and we can then show a meaningful data point to our users. Other industries may find other quirky yet extremely telling metrics that can only be revealed by well-cultivated data. 

On top of right-scaled humans and data that actually matters, you need a large dose of flexibility. To find enough skilled people with a broad grounding in pop culture and strong local knowledge, we had to get creative. We found lots of talented and qualified people in our home region of Eastern Europe. We recruited people from around the world and used crypto to pay those in unstable regions who had the skills we needed. For example, we found a good group of curators in Venezuela, where inflation almost instantly destroys fiat currency values and where banking is chaotic, to say the least. By keeping our focus reasonable, we can make their jobs reasonable, reducing curation or moderation burnout. 

These approaches need to be tailored to your industry, but the human-machine balance in cultivating quality, actionable data should be your goal. It’s allowed us to raise the bar on insights into the live music business, insights we expect to continue to grow richer as time passes. A scalable curation system is possible, with the right mix of openmindedness, tech tools, and smart people.

Does Your Music Qualify For YouTube’s Content ID System?  

Does Your Music Qualify For YouTube’s Content ID System? 

The YouTube content ID fingerprinting system can enable content owners like artists and labels to identify and track the material that they own on the platform – provided, that is, that their music qualifies. 

Guest post by Randi Zimmerman of the Symphonic Blog 

YouTube’s Content ID is a digital fingerprinting system that content creators (like record labels and artists) can use to easily identify and manage their copyrighted content on YouTube. However, whether or not your music qualifies for YouTube’s ContentID is up to many different factors. Not sure if your music qualifies? Here’s what you need to know. 

Does Your Music Qualify for YouTube’s ContentID? 

Luckily for you, we have an additional post that dives deep into what YouTube’s Content ID is and how it works. If you need to refresh your memory, check out “What is YouTube’s Content ID”. 

How to qualify 

To qualify, copyright owners must have the exclusive rights to the material. Some examples of items that may not be exclusive include: 

mashups, “best of”s, compilations, and remixes of other works 
video gameplay, software visuals, trailers 
unlicensed music and video 
music or video that was licensed, but without exclusivity 
recordings of performances (including concerts, events, speeches, shows) 

—————— 

Learn more: 

Everything You Need to Know About YouTube Premieres 

YouTube Release Checklist 

Top 5 Tips for Boosting YouTube Views 

—————— 

YouTube Content ID through Symphonic 

Signing up for YouTube Content ID through Symphonic has several benefits: 

Percentage in payout is often superior to that of others monetization services 
We have a dedicated staff that will not only monetize your videos, but place fingerprints and look for other videos that YouTube’s fingerprinting program does not pick up 
As a distributed client of ours, we will scan each and every song in your catalogue to ensure that we either monetize or takedown any other videos uploaded by third party individuals 

If you’re not already signed up for YouTube Content ID, check out our FAQs and Sign Up process to get started!

Taylor Swift Signs Global Agreement With Universal Music Publishing Group  

Taylor Swift Signs Global Agreement With Universal Music Publishing Group 

Guest post by Tatiana Cirisano 

TAS Rights Management 

L-R: Troy Tomlinson, Jody Gerson, Taylor Swift and Sir Lucian Grainge. 

Taylor Swift has signed an exclusive global publishing deal with Universal Music Publishing Group, broadening her partnership with the Universal Music Group, where Republic Records currently serves as her U.S. label partner. 

“I’m proud to extend my partnership with Lucian Grainge and the Universal Music family by signing with UMPG, and for the opportunity to work with Jody Gerson, the first woman to run a major music publishing company,” Swift said in a press release. “Jody is an advocate for women’s empowerment and one of the most-respected and accomplished industry leaders.” 

She added that Universal Music Publishing Group Nashville chairman/CEO "Troy Tomlinson has been an amazing part of my team for over half my life and a passionate torchbearer for songwriters. It’s an honor to get to work with such an incredible team, especially when it comes to my favorite thing in the world: songwriting.” 

Added Gerson, UMPG chairman/CEO: “We are honored to welcome Taylor Swift to UMPG. Using her power and voice to create a better world, Taylor’s honest and brave songwriting continues to be an inspiration to countless fans. We look forward to further amplifying Taylor's voice and songs across the globe.” 

While a press release describes the deal simply as a multi-year, multi-album agreement, a source familiar with the matter tells Billboard that UMPG will eventually represent her entire catalog. That includes all of the songs on her seven studio albums, her most recent being last year's Billboard 200 chart-topping Lover, and countless hits including "Shake It Off," "Blank Space," "Look What You Made Me Do" and "You Need To Calm Down."

BMG RESPONDS TO ARTIST STREAMING REVOLT IN GERMANY: ‘IT IS TIME FOR RECORD COMPANIES TO CHANGE.’ 

  BMG RESPONDS TO ARTIST STREAMING REVOLT IN GERMANY: ‘IT IS TIME FOR RECORD COMPANIES TO CHANGE.’

As the Grammys continues to dominate discussion in the US music industry, an important story regarding artist streaming royalties in Germany is gathering pace.

Guest Post BY TIM INGHAM of Music Business Worldwide 

As MBW reported Friday (January 24), a group of managers and lawyers representing some of Germany’s biggest artists have written a joint letter to the leaders of the four biggest music rights companies in Germany – Universal, Sony, Warner and BMG. 

The agenda of the letter, undersigned by representatives of 14 artists, “becomes clear very quickly”, according to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper (F.A.Z), which published a more detailed story on the matter today (January 26) on the front page of its business section. Translated, F.A.Z says that the artist reps are demanding “more money from the booming business [created by] music streaming services such as Spotify and Apple Music”.

What’s also clear from the letter, according to F.A.Z: unlike prior artist protests against streaming, the letter does not direct its ire towards digital platforms, but instead “attacks record companies” and is “of the opinion that [the majors] are taking too much of the streaming millions”. 

It should be pointed out for context that most of the artists represented – including the 15m-plus-selling pop star Helene Fischer (pictured) and rock band Rammstein – have traditionally enjoyed large sales of physical records and downloads. 

According to F.A.Z, the artist reps say there is “an urgent and fundamental need to review and, if necessary, restructure the billing and remuneration model in the area of streaming”. This suggests that they may be seeking a switch to a ‘user-centric’ style of payment from the streaming services, who have to date been reticent to embrace this model. 

Last year, Deezer announced that it planned to launch a pilot of a ‘user-centric’ payment system in 2020, if it could gain the requisite support from the major record companies. 

“WE DO NOT FIND IT JUSTIFIABLE IN A WORLD IN WHICH RECORD COMPANIES NO LONGER HAVE THE COSTS OF PRESSING, HANDLING AND DELIVERING PHYSICAL PRODUCT FOR THEM TO TRY TO HOLD ON TO THE LION’S SHARE OF STREAMING REVENUES.” 

BMG SPOKESPERSON 

The letter contains a segment where the artist reps call into question the “adequacy of the remuneration” their clients are receiving from the record companies. 

The artist reps have asked record companies bosses to meet in mid-February in a Berlin hotel to discuss the letter, which F.A.Z reports has a tone “reminiscent of a court summons”. 

Sony and Universal are yet to publicly respond, says the newspaper. Warner has said it won’t be participating in the Berlin meeting due to antitrust concerns that would be created by powerful music companies plus so many representatives of stars coming together to discuss collective business arrangements. Instead, Warner says that “bilateral talks” are being held. 

The MD of JKP – the management company behind Die Toten Hosen – is Patrick Orth. A signatory of the letter, Orth says that the group of 14 artist reps have “very different motives” for backing the collective action. 

Of the music companies targeted, BMG, led by CEO Hartwig Masuch, has been the most forthcoming with its response to the letter. 

A BMG spokesperson said today: “We strongly welcome this attempt to highlight some of the inequities of the traditional record deal. This letter is signed by some of Germany’s most respected music managers and should be taken seriously. 

“We need a sensible, grown-up debate. We do not find it justifiable in a world in which record companies no longer have the costs of pressing, handling and delivering physical product for them to try to hold on to the lion’s share of streaming revenues. 

“The world has changed. It is time for record companies to change too.” 

The headline of the F.A.Z business story today is ‘Der Aufstand der Stars’, translated: ‘The Revolt Of The Stars’.

How Many Spotify Streams Are Necessary To Live Above The Poverty Line?  

How Many Spotify Streams Are Necessary To Live Above The Poverty Line? 

The royalties earned off of Spotify streams are notoriously low but do provide some income to artists. So just how many plays does it take for a musician to live above the poverty line? 

Guest post by James Shotwell of Haulix 

Spotify streaming royalties often upset artists, but how many plays does a musician need to live above the poverty line? We did the math. 

The streaming wars are raging on. Spotify has more than one hundred million monthly subscribers worldwide, which places the platform far ahead of its peers, but Apple Music and Amazon Music are gaining millions of new users with each passing month. Whether or not the global economy can sustain the numerous streaming platforms won’t be decided for some time, but whether or not artists can survive the streaming economy is a hot topic that needs to be addressed. 

Any industry expert will tell you that musicians today have it easy. There are more avenues for exposure than ever, recording music is (or can be) cheap, and an increasing number of artists are finding success outside the traditional label system. It is theoretically possible for anyone with access to a laptop and the ability to convey a melody to become a digital sensation who has fans all over the world without the aid of big label money (though, to be fair, big label money still makes a sizable difference). 

Streaming payouts are a relatively new revenue stream for musicians. No one is suggesting artists survive on streaming royalties alone. Still, with physical media sales bottoming out and competition for tour revenue increasing, the money made from streaming can have a significant impact on an artist’s ability to develop, not to mention sustain themselves. 

Still, every other week someone goes viral online and builds an entire career of the profits made from streaming royalties. The majority of these overnight sensations are young and without families to support, but they still have the cost of living expenses that need to be met. That got us to thinking: How many streams does it take to survive on streaming revenue alone? 

According to the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), the poverty line for single-person households is $11,770. If we ignore how that figure would be hard for anyone to live on in a major city (and most mid-size cities), then we can round up to $12,000 and use streaming revenue calculators to figure out how many Spotify streams someone would need to sustain themselves. 

At an average payout of $0.006 per song stream, a musician living in the United States needs 3,000,000 plays annually to have a gross income of $12,000. 

Of course, if the artist has a label deal the record company would get paid before the artist. Depending on the amount owed to the label, the artist may need millions of addition plays to see the same amount of income themselves. 

But what about people with families? The ASPE puts the poverty line for a family of four (2 adults, 2 children) at $24,250. Using the same average royalty rate, a musician would need 6,062,500 Spotify streams to earn that amount of gross income. 

These numbers get much bigger when the musician is part of a larger group. If a band has four members and all four have families where they were the sole source of income, the group would need to generate 24,250,000 Spotify streams to gross enough so each member’s family would be at or above the poverty line. 

Again, no one is saying an artist should survive on streaming royalties alone. Some will be able to make it work, especially if they have a large following and low overhead, but most will need to create as many revenue streams as possible to survive. The key to a long career in music today is through the development of a community around an artist and their work that promotes purchasing merch, physical media, and concert tickets. That has always been true, and likely won’t change anytime soon.

MLC Chooses As “Digital Services Provider” Company That Sent Fraudulent License Notices To Songwriters  

MLC Chooses As “Digital Services Provider” Company That Sent Fraudulent License Notices To Songwriters 

The new Music Licensing Collective board of directors has chosen the third-party licensing company, the Harry Fox Administration (HFA), to be its digital service provider. That’s the same HFA that musician and artist advocate David Lowery alleges sent songwriters fraudulent license notices. 

Guest post by Dr. David C Lowery from The Trichordist 

The picture shows dozens of backdated “NOIs” for compulsory mechanical licenses sent to me by HFA in 2016.  By purporting to be valid NOIs for licenses when they were not, HFA committed mail fraud. 

Music Row is reporting the music licensing collective board of directors has selected HFA as a digital service provider: 

Technology company ConsenSys and mechanical licensing administrator Harry Fox Agency(HFA) received unanimous approval from the MLC Board to become the primary vendors responsible for managing the matching of digital uses to musical works, distributing mechanical royalties, and onboarding songwriters, composers, lyricists, and music publishers and their catalogs to the database. 

The problem is that HFA was the 3rd party licensing contractor hired by Spotify and other streaming services to obtain licenses from songwriters and publishers.  HFA did not properly do their job leaving streaming services exposed to massive copyright infringement lawsuits (from people like me).  They created the problem that led to the creation of the Music Licensing Collective so now they are rewarded with the contract to run the matching of musical works and paying artists?!?!  Didn’t they just fail spectacularly when asked by Spotify to do this job?  Didn’t the Spotify class action and the four other private lawsuits prove HFA incapable of doing the job? 

Even worse, in order to attempt to cover up the mess, they sent me, many fraudulent “Notices of Intent” or NOIs that purported to execute the federal compulsory mechanical license. They were not valid as they were backdated to make it appear they had sent the notices before the songs were streamed.  I regret now that we didn’t pursue a RICO case against these folks when we were pursuing the copyright infringement cases against the streaming services.  (See the screenshots below.) 

Here’s what the DOJ says about mail fraud. 

940. 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1341—ELEMENTS OF MAIL FRAUD 

“There are two elements in mail fraud: (1) having devised or intending to devise a scheme to defraud (or to perform specified fraudulent acts), and (2) use of the mail for the purpose of executing, or attempting to execute, the scheme (or specified fraudulent acts).” Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705, 721 n. 10 (1989); see also Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 8 (1954) (“The elements of the offense of mail fraud under . . . § 1341 are (1) a scheme to defraud, and (2) the mailing of a letter, etc., for the purpose of executing the scheme.”); Laura A. Eilers & Harvey B. Silikovitz, Mail and Wire Fraud, 31 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 703, 704 (1994) (cases cited). 

Oh and one more thing. HFA was the company that was supposed to pay these streaming royalties back out to the songwriters.  They didn’t do that either.  Where is that money? Shouldn’t the Copyright Office look into this? 

This is a travesty. The members of the MLC  and those that purport to represent songwriters (I’m looking at you NSAI, SONA) have some serious explaining to do to songwriters.  This company was one of the main reasons songwriters didn’t get their mechanicals for 7 going on 8 years. What the fuck were you guys thinking?