Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale
See physical and digital medium royalty does differ. Because you need to buy the physical copy, pay for all songs on that CD, but for digital medium you can listen and chose to like or dislike it. A song could be played on YouTube or Gaana for free but if you don't like it, you change it. That way physical and digital sales (thus royalties) can never be the same.
Music directors and lyricists don't get royalties yet from stage shows...there seems to be some improvement and IPRS has managed to release some funds in the right direction as of now.
The singer is the last one at the scene of the song and its proven even recently about their contributions. Like Bekhayali from Kabir Singh...sung by Arijit and another by Sachet himself. Arijit is considered a benchmark by many, yet Sachet's version did better. So did it matter whether or not Arijit sang it?
I've already mentioned singers get a nominal portion from a different set of royalty but their share will remain lesser than those of the creators of the song. It is how it is, that is the law after all points, mediums of royalty generation, aspects of music making considered. The music director and lyricist will always have a bigger say, simply because its their creation.
All I am saying is, irrespective of the medium, when a song is played anywhere, including the stage shows, the three components that make the song should get a royalty.
Regarding Bekhayali, you are saying what I have been saying all along. Sachet Tandon's voice was more suited Bekhayali than Arijit Singh so he has more views than that of Arijit's version. However, if Sachet Tandon's version had 31 crore views than Arijit singh's version also has 5 crore views and both should get royalty for that as singers.
It might be a law but it need not be just. All three should get royalty and it should not be skewed against singers for their contribution to the song is as important as the other two.
4