Conventions & Awards

U2 Manager Calls Google “Monopoly”, Spotify “Promotional Medium” #MIDEM

image from musically.com

From Cannes by Stuart Dredge for Midem content partner Music Ally. Find them at musically.com and @musically.

Google’s role in the recent campaign against the proposed SOPA anti-piracy legislation in the US came in for a sustained attack by U2′s manager Paul McGuinness this morning, at the Midem conference in Cannes. “Why are they not trying to solve the future in a more generous way?” he asked.

“Ultimately it is in their interests that the flow of content will continue. And that won’t happen unless it’s paid for. And I don’t think we can rely on politicians who are afraid of being unpopular to accomplish this without some willingness and generosity on the part of the tech area.”

Referring specifically to the anti-SOPA campaign, which included an online petition linked to from Google’s homepage, McGuinness did not mince his words.

“Never underestimate the ability of a monopoly to defend itself,” he said. “The fact that Google were able to turn their entire network into a lobbying device, a petition, does not mean every person who ticked the box understood the argument… It wasn’t really a debate, it was a demonstration really.”

McGuinness also criticised Google for not doing more to strip links to pirated content out of its search engine results.

“It amazes me that Google has not done the right thing. The experience of people when they go on Google and look for U2 music or PJ Harvey music is a shopping list of illegal opportunities to get their music,” he said. “They have done nothing meaningful to discourage that.”

McGuinness had warmer words for licensed streaming music services like Spotify, which he described as “ultimately a good thing”, although that praise came with caveats.

“Is it a means of monetising the distribution of products, or is it a promotional medium? At the moment, I’m inclined to treat it more as a promotional medium. And if we have to choose where to put records on their debut, we’re unlikely to give them to Spotify. I’d rather give it to a DJ on a great station,” he said.

“Spotify has yet to become popular with artists because artists don’t see the financial benefit of working with Spotify. That’s partly the fault of the labels because the labels partly own Spotify, and there is insufficient transparency. But I see no reason why the basic Spotify model shouldn’t be part of the future. It is essentially honest so it should be encouraged. I’d like to see it everywhere.”

McGuinness was talking in a panel session with author Robert Levine, entertainment lawyer Pierre-Marie Bouvery and Qobuz president Yves Riesel. Read our liveblog for the full skinny on the discussion.

Google’s role in recent  anti-SOPA campaigns in the US came in for a sustained attack by U2′s manager Paul McGuinness this morning, at the Midem conference in Cannes. “Why are they not trying to solve the future in a more generous way?” he asked.

“Ultimately it is in their interests that the flow of content will continue. And that won’t happen unless it’s paid for. And I don’t think we can rely on politicians who are afraid of being unpopular to accomplish this without some willingness and generosity on the part of the tech area.”

Referring specifically to the anti-SOPA campaign, which included an online petition linked to from Google’s homepage, McGuinness did not mince his words.

“Never underestimate the ability of a monopoly to defend itself,” he said. “The fact that Google were able to turn their entire network into a lobbying device, a petition, does not mean every person who ticked the box understood the argument… It wasn’t really a debate, it was a demonstration really.”

McGuinness also criticised Google for not doing more to strip links to pirated content out of its search engine results.

“It amazes me that Google has not done the right thing. The experience of people when they go on Google and look for U2 music or PJ Harvey music is a shopping list of illegal opportunities to get their music,” he said. “They have done nothing meaningful to discourage that.”

McGuinness had warmer words for licensed streaming music services like Spotify, which he described as “ultimately a good thing”, although that praise came with caveats.

“Is it a means of monetising the distribution of products, or is it a promotional medium? At the moment, I’m inclined to treat it more as a promotional medium. And if we have to choose where to put records on their debut, we’re unlikely to give them to Spotify. I’d rather give it to a DJ on a great station,” he said.

“Spotify has yet to become popular with artists because artists don’t see the financial benefit of working with Spotify. That’s partly the fault of the labels because the labels partly own Spotify, and there is insufficient transparency. But I see no reason why the basic Spotify model shouldn’t be part of the future. It is essentially honest so it should be encouraged. I’d like to see it everywhere.”

McGuinness was talking in a panel session with author Robert Levine, entertainment lawyer Pierre-Marie Bouvery and Qobuz president Yves Riesel. Read our liveblog for the full skinny on the discussion.

Share on:

18 Comments

  1. Easy for him to dis Google and their efforts to block SOPA, he doesn’t NEED the Internet to promote U2 ciz their f@$king rich! Obviously this guy has no ideas what it’s like to try making a name for yourself in music these days and a free and open Internet is the most important tool young artists have at ther disposal. Take their ability away to create and distribute content and you stifle the next generation. Anti-piracy is one thing but anti-evolution of the industry is another. This guy is one more example of the OLD music industry.

  2. The big, fat music industry is the real monopoly, keeping out the new, original-sounding, and interesting artists. I believe in cooperation and working together to make music continue to get better and better, rather than sounding like bands have ‘sold out’ or just done whatever they have to make loads of money. The money will come for those who are honest, have a good connection with music lovers, the fans, and put their emphasis on writing and recording good sounding songs, and make it easy for everyone to find songs at a reasonable download price, make their own compilation album downloads, etc. The music industry also needs to get more CDs out to stores and people will buy them. They need to promote new music CD debuts and digitally remastered (older) CD ‘new’ availability at stores across America and other countries. I would have the bands going out to record stores, making appearances, signing autographs, meeting the fans, etc. If the music industry would get of their collective butt and start doing some of my suggestions, you would see big improvements.

  3. I wanted to add that I’m opposed to illegal music or movies or file sharing. However, I’m 100 percent in favor of better information access and the rights of writers/journalists/music reviewers to access and write about any and all music which is can be publicly viewed on such websites as YouTube. Any subjects should be open to journalists for to report on, review, provide analyis, and opinion; if not we risk winding up like Iran or China. I know U2 and their manager, and everyone else, doesn’t want that.
    I’m 100 percent opposed to Internet censorship and 100 percent supporting, defending, and protecting the United States Constitution, the freedom of speech and freedom of press as they are guaranteed by the Constitution.
    As a footnote, I like U2 very much and wish they would get back to make records that sound more like “October”.

  4. Unfortunately you’re wrong. You have a real chance of making a living in music. Protecting your rights is essential. Don’t be fooled by multi-billion internet corporations billing themselves as freedom. You can choose to share your free music. The issue is stealing the music you as an individual artist do not want to share. This is not a new argument. Copyright issues have been fought and won in favor of artists for the last one hundred years. The internet doesn’t change the fundamental issue of pirating an artist work. Everything is heading to the internet. TV, everything. Even if you don’t join the fight, fine. But other artists will fight against monopolies like Google.

  5. Yes, those who can should do. Rights holders should refrain from anything they are not comfortable with, without being publicly exoriated. To me at least, that is freedom.

  6. Thanks for the spelling correction.
    To clarify, there is a difference between criticism and truly defamatory behavior. It would be ludicrous to defend the latter.
    Of course i am not referring to this thread, Generally speaking, it can happen.

  7. Agreed. It’s all moving online. Even though music is just a very small part of the whole, it’s important not to be misled by the spin. It’s all about your content and data, and huge businesses have been built upon it.

  8. Well said. I hope young people wake up before they have missed the opportunity to stand up for their rights.

  9. +1 . Pressure is strong on artists ( and content creators in general) to give up and surender once and for all the rights for wich they fought during the last hundred years, in favor of multi-billion tech corporations.
    And many artists are getting convinced by the rethoric of such tech companies, and giving up, but it doesn’t have to be like that.

  10. Cheryl B. Engelhardt recently wrote a great article on how to turn your career goals into actual results. She’s had a fascinating career as a composer and musician, and she writes eloquently about the steps you can take to turn your dreams into reality. Check out the article here:
    http://blog.discmakers.com/2012/01/4-steps-to-convert-goals-into-results/ Much of the article is an excerpt from her great new E-course “In the Key of Success: The Five Week Jump-Start Strategy”, available from http://www.cbemusic.com/ecourse/

  11. I love U2. They changed my life. I have a lot of respect for the boys and McGuinness. But why in the world are they asking him about the *future* of the music business? Wonder if anyone told him that Peter Gabriel went dark on the 18th as well. Interesting that he thought Spotify (doesn’t pay Indies anything of significance) was better than Google (that at least let’s you monetize YouTube if your numbers warrant).

Comments are closed.