Living Wage for Musicians Act: A Step Towards Fair Streaming Compensation?
As the music industry marches towards a pivotal juncture, the reintroduction of the Living Wage for Musicians Act on September 29 is poised to reignite debates on fair artist compensation in the streaming age. Spearheaded by US politician Rashida Tlaib and supported by the United Musicians and Allied Workers (UMAW), the bill proposes a direct payment mechanism to ensure artists receive a minimum of a penny per stream. Central to this proposal is a levy on Digital Service Providers (DSPs), equivalent to 50% of the subscription fees and a 10% charge on non-subscription revenues, to establish an ‘Artist Compensation Royalty Fund.’ This fund would deliver royalties directly to both featured and non-featured artists, destabilizing the traditional role of rightsholders. Although the initiative reflects a definitive momentum—endorsed by a supportive New York City Council resolution—it is anticipated to encounter resistance from key industry stakeholders including DSPs and major labels, who have historically favored ‘artist-centric’ delivery models over such direct royalty schemes, as seen in international contexts like the UK. Yet, beyond legislative victories or defeats, the act’s revival could serve as a catalyst for broader discussions about the real value of music and fair artist remuneration, challenging the assumption that current subscription rates adequately compensate creators. The call for artists and fans to engage their congressional representatives underscores the grassroots drive behind this measure. As September 29 approaches, the music industry watches closely to determine whether this legislative effort marks the beginning of a paradigm shift or just another chapter in the ongoing dialogue about the economics of music in the digital era. In this landscape, SONGLENS remains dedicated to promoting insightful industry discourse and championing emerging music through curation and integrity-first storytelling.
