A little humble insight. If this song made no money from not 1 stream, it doesn't lessen the value of the actual content. This song could have never been released to the public and it wouldn't matter, it is the fact that the registered song was taken/used and played all over the place in other countries, that's the reason for the expert advice providing a figure of around $630K (which isn't greedy at all). That isn't the figure that the lawyer gave and it isn't made up from the sky, that is a figure given by someone who has over 50 years of experience in the music industry. That's real world, real figures when you are talking about international advertising, not "Bahamas music industry". The only ones being greedy are the ones using the tax payers money to pay lawyers fees over $800 hourly. Nah aint that something.
123bucklemyshoe says...
A little humble insight. If this song made no money from not 1 stream, it doesn't lessen the value of the actual content. This song could have never been released to the public and it wouldn't matter, it is the fact that the registered song was taken/used and played all over the place in other countries, that's the reason for the expert advice providing a figure of around $630K (which isn't greedy at all). That isn't the figure that the lawyer gave and it isn't made up from the sky, that is a figure given by someone who has over 50 years of experience in the music industry. That's real world, real figures when you are talking about international advertising, not "Bahamas music industry". The only ones being greedy are the ones using the tax payers money to pay lawyers fees over $800 hourly. Nah aint that something.
On Tourism: $630k for $22 song ‘illogical’
Posted 12 January 2019, 12:04 a.m. Suggest removal