

Music is everybody's business!

Music is everybody's business!Music is everybody's business!Music is everybody's business!
JOIN our UNION

Music is everybody's business!

Music is everybody's business!Music is everybody's business!Music is everybody's business!
JOIN our UNION

THE MAJOR LABELS ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY


 

Why the Major Labels Fear Technology


Steve Knopper — former Rolling Stone writer and author of Appetite for Self-Destruction — described the pattern plainly in the acclaimed documentary Killswitch: the music and film industries have repeatedly fought technologies they considered threats, from recorded music and long-playing albums to CDs and digital distribution.

“The labels and film companies have fought technology from the beginning,” Knopper said, “and they continue to do so now.”

That is the pattern: whenever technology threatens to reduce the industry’s control, the major labels resist it.



What Artists Can Now Do Without Labels


Artists can now record affordably, distribute worldwide, promote their work, sell merchandise, build mailing lists, manage memberships, crowdfund projects, and connect directly with listeners.

They can also hire, as needed:

• independent distribution
• recording and production services
• marketing and promotion
• licensing and synchronization specialists
• data, playlist, and audience-development services

Functions once used to justify major-label control can now be managed independently and on a project-by-project basis. Artists no longer need long-term contracts with Sony, Universal, or Warner to build professional careers.

As the late Linkin Park singer Chester Bennington observed, these companies “have very little to do with the creative process of making music.”



Why the Majors Still Hold Power


Major labels remain powerful because they dominate — or appear to dominate — areas that individual artists struggle to access, including global promotion, radio, playlists, licensing, financing, and market data.

That power was built through market control, control over pricing, suppression of competition, and generations of artists being taught that traditional label contracts were the only viable path.

But that power lasts only while musicians continue to believe they have no alternative.


Labels as Intermediaries


George Howard, the Berklee College of Music professor who co-created the original Music2020 website with Scott Kirby, argued that record labels function primarily as intermediaries.

Services such as TuneCore and CD Baby proved that artists could distribute music without traditional label structures. Social media then challenged another old assumption: that labels must stand between musicians and their audiences.

Howard’s question remains urgent: should an economic gatekeeper positioned between creator and audience be allowed to extract so much value from that relationship?



The Radio Promotion Myth


Labels do not create radio exposure. They deliver music to radio stations, but the stations decide what receives airplay.

Meanwhile, recording costs have fallen dramatically since the era of analog tape, pressing plants, and physical retail. Artists can now hire only the services they need, retain greater control, and avoid paying for corporate intervention they never requested.



Doing Less, Earning More


If labels are contributing less while earning more, why should so much money continue flowing to companies with little involvement in the creative work?

Global recorded-music revenue reached approximately $31.7 billion in 2025, marking an eleventh consecutive year of growth. Streaming generated more than $22 billion — nearly 70 percent of the total — while paid subscriptions in the United States produced about $6.4 billion.

The labels do not need to make $70 million a day. The money should be going to the people who create the music.



Two Different Questions


Can technology make a record label unnecessary for an individual artist? Absolutely. For some, it already has.

Can it make the major labels themselves irrelevant? It could — but promising alternatives have repeatedly been acquired or neutralized before they could transform the industry.

The deeper question is this: when will an ordinary working musician be able to build a commercially viable, direct relationship with the people who value that musician’s work?

Streaming removed physical distributors and record stores, but installed a new intermediary between artists and listeners. Social media promised direct access, yet algorithms, platforms, aggregators, recommendation systems, and advertising markets still determine who gets reached.

The gatekeeper changed. The problem did not.



The Unsolved Problem: The Artist–Fan Economy


The internet solved distribution more than twenty years ago. It has not solved the musician’s economic relationship with the fan.

The missing structure is:

Artist → discovery → trusted relationship → payment → continuing fan relationship

The artist must retain control of that relationship while losing as little value as possible along the way. Solving this for ordinary working musicians — not only superstars such as Taylor Swift or Beyoncé — could transform the record business.



A Fairer Model


The industry we propose would operate closer in spirit to YouTube, where creators receive a meaningful portion of the revenue generated by their work — commonly cited at around 55 percent.

The precise percentage can be debated. The principle cannot: creators should receive far more than they do under the major-label system.

A healthier music economy would allow:

• fans to pay less because fewer intermediaries are involved
• artists to retain more of the value they create
• musicians to build direct and lasting audience relationships
• technology to help artists understand and reach their markets independently



Musicians Must Organize


The Screen Actors Guild protects people who work for major studios and enforces their rights. No equivalent organization exists for musicians, songwriters, and their fans.

The Council of Music Makers states it clearly: “Without musicians and the music they make, there can be no music industry.”

The same cannot be said of the major labels.

Musicians are essential. Major labels are not. But the industry will not change by itself. Musicians must organize, speak collectively, and build a superior alternative.


That is the purpose of Music2020: to give musicians a place where their voices can be heard — and united.

TAKE A MOMENT TO READ THIS...

THE FUTURE THE INDUSTRY REFUSED

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

  

In 2000, five major radio groups launched the Local Media Internet Venture—LMIV. It was more than an attempt to bring local radio online.

It was built upon a truth the music industry refused to recognize:

Radio marketed the music, created demand, and built audiences—yet it was denied the opportunity to participate in the business it helpe

  

In 2000, five major radio groups launched the Local Media Internet Venture—LMIV. It was more than an attempt to bring local radio online.

It was built upon a truth the music industry refused to recognize:

Radio marketed the music, created demand, and built audiences—yet it was denied the opportunity to participate in the business it helped create.


LMIV offered broadcasters a collectively owned path into the emerging digital music economy. But the established industry resisted any model that threatened its control or allowed new participants to share in the value of music.


This was not an isolated failure.

Again and again, promising technologies and alternative business models have been resisted, restricted, or absorbed to preserve the existing structure of power.


Music is everybody’s business. Its future must include everyone who helps create its value.

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

 

In 2008, eMusic was building a different kind of digital music experience. Its independent catalog and recommendation system combined technology with human musical judgment to help listeners discover artists beyond the major-label spotlight.


In 2009, eMusic agreed to add Sony Music’s catalog. The deal did not destroy its technology. But i

 

In 2008, eMusic was building a different kind of digital music experience. Its independent catalog and recommendation system combined technology with human musical judgment to help listeners discover artists beyond the major-label spotlight.


In 2009, eMusic agreed to add Sony Music’s catalog. The deal did not destroy its technology. But it changed the direction of a platform whose identity had been built around independent discovery.


What might eMusic have become if it had remained focused on that vision? And how can an alternative stay independent when the industry it seeks to challenge controls so much of the music—and the terms for accessing it?


We cannot know what eMusic’s future would have been. We can learn from the question it leaves behind: building an alternative is only the beginning. 

Keeping it independent is part of the work.

THE ALTERNATIVE SONY BOUGHT

THE ALTERNATIVE THAT CHANGED COURSE

The music industry will not change on its own.

 

Kobalt built its reputation on technology designed to give creators greater visibility into their rights and royalties. Through AWAL, it also offered independent artists data, distribution, and a path outside the traditional major-label model.


In 2021, Sony Music bought AWAL and Kobalt Neighbouring Rights.

 

AWAL continues to operate, but i

 

Kobalt built its reputation on technology designed to give creators greater visibility into their rights and royalties. Through AWAL, it also offered independent artists data, distribution, and a path outside the traditional major-label model.


In 2021, Sony Music bought AWAL and Kobalt Neighbouring Rights.

 

AWAL continues to operate, but its future is now under major-label ownership. Sony gained control of an alternative that had grown outside its system.


Seen alongside other promising paths that changed course, this acquisition deserves scrutiny. What happens to transparency, efficiency, and artist control when the companies whose power those advances might reduce own the tools that deliver them?


 

The platform remains. Its independence does not. Building a different music industry requires technology—and a way to keep its purpose under the control of the people it was built to serve.

The music industry will not change on its own.

The music industry will not change on its own.

The music industry will not change on its own.

Music2020.org exists to bring artists, fans, and every participant in the music ecosystem into the conversation about what the future of music should become—including the structures, technologies, and principles required to build it.


MusicRevolt.org exists to turn that vision into collective action. It is where individuals become an organi

Music2020.org exists to bring artists, fans, and every participant in the music ecosystem into the conversation about what the future of music should become—including the structures, technologies, and principles required to build it.


MusicRevolt.org exists to turn that vision into collective action. It is where individuals become an organized force—with a clear purpose, a concrete plan, and the determination to challenge the concentration of power that has shaped the industry for decades.


The law already provides creators with important rights, including, in certain cases, the opportunity to reclaim ownership of their music. But rights accomplish nothing when artists remain uninformed, isolated, and unrepresented.


Music 2020 defines the future.

Music Revolt organizes the people who will build it.


This is not simply a call for change.
This could be THE LAST CALL.

WHOSE INDUSTRY IS IT?

The music industry will not change on its own.

WHOSE INDUSTRY IS IT?

 Three major-label groups dominate the global music industry, exercising enormous influence over the music that reaches the public and the terms under which digital platforms must operate.


When Steve Jobs introduced the 99-cent download nearly twenty-five years ago, technology promised to transform the industry. Streaming later changed the

 Three major-label groups dominate the global music industry, exercising enormous influence over the music that reaches the public and the terms under which digital platforms must operate.


When Steve Jobs introduced the 99-cent download nearly twenty-five years ago, technology promised to transform the industry. Streaming later changed the way music was delivered—but it did not change who held the power.


The technology changed. The structure of control did not.

Digital platforms now depend on access to the catalogs controlled by the major labels. That dependence forces them to operate within a system designed primarily to protect concentrated corporate power—not the people who create the music or those who sustain it.


Our movement exists to build a music industry that is truly:

of the people who create it,
by the people who sustain it,
and for everyone whose life and work give music its value.


The choice is ours: remain uninformed, isolated, and powerless—or become informed, organized, and determined to demand justice and fair treatment throughout the music ecosystem.


The industry will not change until we do.

WE RECOMMEND...

The Last Call examines how the modern music industry lost its balance and what it would take to rebuild it.

From copyright and payola to streaming platforms, algorithms, and artificial intelligence, the book reveals how control over music shifted away from creators and into the hands of a few powerful players. It shows how today’s system was not shaped by innovation alone, but by structures that prioritize control over fairness, leaving artists without meaningful representation in the decisions that define their work and their future.

At the same time, it offers a clear alternative: a framework for a music industry built on transparency, creator ownership, and collective organization. Through practical ideas on compensation, governance, education, and technology, The Last Call outlines how a more equitable and sustainable ecosystem could emerge, one where artists are not isolated participants, but a unified force capable of shaping the system, not just surviving within it.

This is not just a critique of what went wrong. It is a vision of what could be built instead.

AMAZON




Video

Did you know the music industry is hijacked?

Music deserves to be free. This industry isn’t sustainability. It’s a monopoly disguised as a creative industry.

WHO WE ARE

BEHIND THE CALL

 

Music 2020 grew out of decades of firsthand experience in the music industry—and the conviction that the people who give music its value must have a voice in its future.


This movement invites artists, fans, and everyone who helps sustain music to become informed, join the conversation, and act together.

The call began with experience. The change will take all of us.

Be Part of the Change

Copyright © 2026 Music 2020 - Todos los derechos reservados.

Con tecnología de

Este sitio web utiliza cookies

Usamos cookies para analizar el tráfico del sitio web y optimizar tu experiencia en el sitio. Al aceptar nuestro uso de cookies, tus datos se agruparán con los datos de todos los demás usuarios.

Aceptar