Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Taylor Swift VS. Spotify
Transcript of Taylor Swift VS. Spotify
T. Swift removed entire catalog from Spotify
Intention was to boost profits .
Why this represents a problem
T. Swift & Spotify are both monopolists
REVISE COPYRIGHT LAWS TO:
Accommodate growing industry
Artists able to negotiate contracts
Allows artists to reflect their intentions behind providing music to streaming providers
Swift believed Spotify was not paying her enough
Utilizes other channels
Album sales, higher paying services
Decision leads to many forms of harm to both sides
Financial revenue harm
Potential economic harm if other artists follow
Taylor Swift VS. Spotify
Reduction In Value
Lost Earnings for Swift
Paying subscribers are unable to listen to 1989 Album
Reduces consumer value of service
Decrease in amount of people willing to pay for premium service
Other artists follow?
Further reduce membership value
Likely increase in piracy
Utilize other services
Streaming services grew 28% in the first half of 2014
Account for 27% of industry revenue.
Swift loses long-term royalties from Spotify
Many consumers may turn to
instead to illegally download her music.
Revenues (US Billions)
Decrease in consumer surplus
Decrease in value for paying customers of Spotify's Premium Membership
Revise copyright laws to accommodate continual growth
Consumer Surplus Reduced
Swift only wants music available to paid subscribers
More Significant because
wants to raise prices charged to consumers
won't change the price they pay to artists
Change in Consumer Surplus for previous non-paying users
Decrease in Consumer Surplus
Music Piracy Studies and Statistics
2007 IPI analysis: U.S. economy loses $12.5 billion to piracy
2012 NPD Group Survey: number of files illegally downloaded was 26% less than in 2012 and 2011 due to increasing in stream capabilities.
By: Leah Campbell, Alyssa Lavik, Jason Moore,
Jaclyn Rosenthal & Katie Landmark