Music icon Pete Townshend criticized Apple, referring to its iTunes music service as a ‘digital vampire.’ He emphasized the necessity for enhanced support and financial compensation for artists from online platforms.
During a keynote address, The Who’s guitarist stated that the internet was ‘destroying copyright’ and insisted that musicians and writers deserve payment if their work generates revenue for others.
Townshend rejected claims that ‘sharing’ music promotes awareness of artists.
While delivering the inaugural BBC 6 Music John Peel Lecture at the Radio Festival in Salford, Lancashire, he stated: ‘The word “sharing” surely signifies giving away something you have earned, created, or purchased?’
Nevertheless, his strongest criticism was aimed at Apple’s iTunes, which he accused of profiting without offering any support for music acts.
The company dominates around 70 legal download services, accounting for over 75 percent of all music downloads.
Additionally, iTunes releases a track from an emerging artist weekly and has hosted a month-long festival each year featuring 300 artists over the last five years.
Townshend questioned: ‘Is there any valid justification for why iTunes, simply because it operates in the wild west terrain of Facebook and Twitter, cannot provide some level of support to the artists whose work it extracts profit from like a digital vampire for its extensive commission?’
He proposed an eight-point plan to adequately support the music industry, suggesting the recruitment of ‘A&R’-style personnel to identify talent, guide, train, and financially assist young artists as established record labels do.
According to him, iTunes should also assist artists in safeguarding their copyright and make it easier for them to ‘stream’ their music.
Townshend asserted that the platform should pay smaller artists directly instead of requiring them to go through a third-party ‘aggregator,’ and should license artists it signs for physical music releases.
iTunes did not respond to Townshend’s remarks.
The musician, whose Lifehouse rock-opera foresaw a concept akin to the internet nearly 40 years ago, mentioned that people need to change their approach to digital music.
‘It would be preferable for music lovers to treat music like food, paying for every portion, rather than only when it is convenient for them.
‘Why can’t music enthusiasts just pay for music instead of stealing it?’ he questioned the audience of broadcasting professionals.
Townshend criticized an environment in which ‘creativity’ offers little reward since it is not compensated at an hourly rate.
‘We now dwell in a digital landscape where the only constant is work measured by hours,’ he stated.
‘Lawyers, accountants, doctors, nurses, plumbers, painters, truck drivers, farmers, pilots, cleaners, actors, musicians – all receive payment for their work based on time spent.’
‘Creative work, however, doesn’t follow this model. Any of the professionals mentioned could devise a method that allows others to carry out their jobs for them. This could be digitized and made available on the internet.’
He continued: ‘Yet, if someone impersonates me or claims that my creations should be freely accessible to them—because creativity is deemed less valuable than an hour’s work I might do in a pub—I question what has gone awry with human morality and social equity.’
by Wallace McTavish
