Activities of Niklas NIENASS related to 2023/2054(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market
Amendments (42)
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas human creativity and creative professionals such as authors and performers are at the origin and source of all music that is distributed on streaming platform;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the rise of music streaming services returned the European music sector to sustained growth following years of decline; whereas this growth has been generated at the expense of music creators' remuneration, whose share in the allocation of streaming revenues remains significantly lower than that of big corporate players in the streaming value chain;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the increasing number of acquisitions of song catalogues and recording rights by investors in recent years proves the overall enormous economic value and potential of written and recorded music;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas streaming music is now the main way in which people around the world enjoy music, providing access to up to 300 million tracks on commercial platforms, available anywhere, anytime and on all kinds of devices, for a comparatively low monthly subscription fee that has barely increased since the emerging of such services;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas most data shows the market to be in relatively good health, studies also point out that the figures used mask a more nuanced situation characterised in particular by a decline in the overall value of products, a concentration of takings or a disruption of the market by new systems of fraud, all these problems affecting the fairness of revenues and the diversity available ;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, although authors and performers are at the heart of music creation, they are neitherfrequently not recognised nor remunerated in a way that reflects the true extent of their contribution, receiving very low revenues generated by the music streaming market, which creates a significant imbalance over time that needs to be addressed;1a _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/BRIE/2023/747252/IPOL_BRI(20 23)747252_EN.pdf
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas music streaming platforms, through their use of algorithms and recommendation systems, play a decisiven important role ion determining what subscribers listen to and therefore have a significant impact on cultural diversitythe music consumed and therefore on cultural diversity but also affect creators who do not fully control the means of their communication;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas music streaming platforms should continue their efforts to increase overall transparency and traceability concerning many operational aspects of high relevance to authors, performers, rightholders, the audience and the general public, including most notably the functioning of their payment and remuneration systems, the curation of playlists, the discoverability of works, and the availability of metadata;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas the live music sector offers audiovisual streaming of music and live performances; whereas these streamings are non-commercial offers in the majority of cases and are often published on online platforms to give access to culture to a wider audience;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the promotion of cultural diversity in the European music streaming market needs to be ensured and cannot depend solely on the commercial decisions of a few private dominant global operators;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the music sector is increasingly confronted with the rise of AI- generated content with a growing number of tracks flooding streaming platforms on a daily basis; thereby threatening to further aggravate existing imbalances to the detriment of music creators and making the discoverability of European works on streaming platforms even more challenging; whereas the development of AI technologies should instead serve and enhance human creativity;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas several cases of streaming fraud and manipulation or streams by fake artists have been identified,have been identified, and while detecting systems exist these identification mechanisms are limited in mitigating fraudulent behaviour - as certain players work to manipulate the system to skim off revenues that should go to authors and creators, for example, by using bots to artificially inflate the number of listeners for certain songs, and whereas a significant number of streams worldwide could be generated artificially;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas more concerdedicated efforts should be made to tackle and eliminate these issues, given their impact on the market, in particular on revenue share; whereas in regards to authors’ in particular on revenues from streaming services, a thorough investigation is necessary to collect data and analyse the current situation;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the fact that all actors in the music streaming value chain need to engage and make the necessary changes to ensure a fair and sustainable ecosystem in the sector and ensure editorial developments don't negatively affect diversity, local repertoire and opportunities for artist discovery; Strongly recommends that the stakeholders take the necessary steps to overcome the current imbalances in the allocation of revenues; calls on the Commission to monitor and to encourage progress in this regard and to consider appropriate policy proposals should voluntary stakeholder initiatives fail to produce meaningful solutions;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that voices of authors and performers must be taken into consideration in order to live up to the artistic, cultural and societal value and importance of their role in the music market; welcomes any efforts to improve the payment systems of music streaming platforms towards more adequately benefiting authors and performers;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Takes note that EU wide licenses raise concerns about diversity as they can be contracted for specific repertoires and small repertoires being at risk of being less economically interesting than bigger ones; stresses in this regard, that not only could providers be more inclined to stream more popular and profitable repertoires but also collective management organisations (CMOs) could then change their offer strategies in order to be more financially sustainable; Recalls that according to Directive 2014/26/EUf there should be a free market for organisations representing and collecting fair remuneration for creators, performers and record producers;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission to evaluate whether the fundamental principle of appropriate and proportionate remuneration is fulfilled by current payment systems of streaming platforms as well as by existing contracts concluded between authors and performers on the one hand and other actors of the value chain within the music sector on the other;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Encourages the Commission to evaluate whether technologies such as blockchain have the potential to improve the overall situation, especially for authors, performers and rightholders, with regards to transparency, accuracy and cost efficiency, in particular concerning metadata and remuneration;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that the key role of authors should be reflected through greater visibility on the music streaming services and a more balanced distribution of streaming revenues; Calls on the industry to explore new and fairer models to reallocate streaming revenues between different tracks based on new criteria, assessing how music streaming platforms count streams and allocate revenues; Calls for an assessment of streaming platforms remuneration policies away from the pro-rata rates that are too favorable to the most popular artists and look into other alternatives such as user- centred models seen as fairer and expected to have a positive effect on the fight against streaming fraud;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that it is essential to improve authors’the identification of authors on music streaming services, in particular by ensuring a comprehensive and accurate metadata allocation from the time of creation, recognising its key role on the discoverability and by using this data to improve the platforms’ search functions as a way to boost their visibility;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on all music industry players to intensify their efforts to ensure the comprehensive and correct metadata allocation of songs by identifying and accurately reporting authors’ data for their musical works; Recalls that nowadays artists can choose to record and release their work through artist and label services or fully independently, which gives them more artistic and financial autonomy and more freedom to contract; Notes in this regard, that the latter is a model that is attracting more and more artists on streaming platforms and believes that they should have the ability to waive their right to be part of CMOs and be legally able to directly manage their remuneration when they are not members of any CMO or independent management entities, even through the service of a platform that distributes their music;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes with concern that inequalities of old rates of revenue sharing seem to have persisted despite the structural changes in the market and labels continue to hold a dominant position; strongly believes that all artists should receive a fair contemporary digital rate; calls, therefore, on record labels to commit to revising all pre-digital royalty rates;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the need to raise awareness, in particular among young authors, of the importance of accurately identifying songs with the proper metadata; Encourages research programmes and innovative initiatives that allow authors and citizens to understand metadata indexing and improve their acquisition of recommendation system.
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Condemns the existence of so- called payolaany schemes, which force authors to accept lower revenues in exchange for greater visibility, thereby further reducing their already very low streaming revenues, while the promise of greater visibility remains unfulfilled in most cases;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Highlights the importance of overall transparency and traceability concerning many operational aspects of high relevance to authors, performers, rightholders, the audience and the general public, including most notably the functioning of the streaming platforms’ payment and remuneration systems, the curation of playlists, the discoverability of works, and the availability of metadata; regrets that in general, music streaming platforms significantly lack such transparency and traceability
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls the need to ensure the value of authors’ rights regardless of music streaming services’ offers; notes that authors across Europe complain about insufficient revenues they receive from music streaming platforms and denounces the practices that impose on authors less or no remuneration for the use of their works;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Asks all actors in the music streaming sector to work together to assess and reduce the carbon footprint of digital music;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Believes the status quo rewards global homogeneity of content, and under-represents local or niche artists; notes it gives no incentive to invest in more diverse forms of repertoire, by language or genre; asks the Member States and the Commission to put in place measures that would allow to boost local repertoire and languages by better profiling in playlisting and other features or specific mechanisms allocated to investment in new, local recordings;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Promotes the sharing of information about artists live performances on platforms, especially for local artists, to facilitate new discoveries and further visibility;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to assess the situation regarding visibility and accessibility of European works and to propose a legal framework to ensure theits prominence and discoverability of European works on music streaming platforms;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that music is streamed through different types of platforms, including via digital music service providers and online content sharing service providers; Underlines the important role that both types of service providers play when it comes to access to music; Calls on the Commission to include all relevant service providers in any future legislative proposals aimed at promoting transparency of algorithms and prominence of European works at EU level;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission, in this context, to ensure that this framework includes specific diversity indicators that would allow for an independent assessment of the use andand parameters to be adapted by platforms’ algorithms for better visibility of European works, for example, in national and minorityof minority and regional languages or published by independent authors and that it highlights best practices to test diversified content promoted on platform interfaces;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses, moreover, that this would require regular monitoring and reporting on the prominence and discoverators to adopt a clear methodology to comprehend and monitor the visibility of European works on, among others, curated playlists, user interfaces, algorithmic choices and recommendation systems with a positive obligation to ensure such prominence and discoverability;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to reflect on the possibility of imposing quotas on European works on, regional and local works on playlist recommendations of music streaming platforms;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to assess adequate ways in order to preserve the digital European musical heritage, while reducing the de- facto dependence on commercial music streaming platforms, ensuring the availability and accessibility of European musical works in the long term;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to propose legal obligations to ensure the transparency of the algorithms and content recommendation systems of very largeall relevant music streaming platforms, with a view to preventing fraudulent and unfair streaming manipulation practices, such as streaming fraud and fake artists that are used to reduce costs and further lower value for professional authors, as well as to ensure cultural diversity;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Asks music services to invest efforts to identify unlawful activity that removes value from creators, including streaming manipulation, ad-blocking and stream-ripping software;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that the public should be informed if the musical works, songs or artists they listen to on music streaming platforms have been generated by AI and not by human authors; stresses, in this regard, the need to set up an ‘AI- generwork towards ensuring consumers are well-informed, such as through appropriated’ labels; for example to inform about purely AI- generated musicworks that do not involve the expression of the author's personality and creativity;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises, furthermore, the need to ensure that authors, who are in a position to authorise works have been prevent their works being used for training AI-generating applications, and that they receive fair remuneration for it when their works are used with their agreement and consistent with existing law; highlights the important role that collective management organisations should play in carrying out the collection and redistribution of this remuneration;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Emphasises that the rise of AI- generated content and a growing number of tracks being uploaded to streaming platforms will further increase the importance of creating a legal framework that ensures the prominence and discoverability of European works on streaming platforms;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Emphasises the need to ensure that authors and performers’ identities, voices and likenesses are not misappropriated during the creation of music with the use of AI;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Invites the Commission to establish a structured dialogue between theall stakeholders in order to discuss current issues affecting the music streaming market and to work together to find common solutions;