Why the Major Labels Fear Technology
Steve Knopper — former Rolling Stone writer and author of Appetite for Self-Destruction, the award-winning book on the decline of the music industry — said it plainly in the acclaimed documentary Killswitch:
“The movie and film industries have always fought what they thought were outside technological threats. They said, ‘We’re gonna fight recorded music on long playing albums when they came out, because we’ve always relied on sheet music.’”
That was only the beginning. Knopper continued: “Then they said, ‘We’re gonna fight the CD when it replaced vinyl,’ because the labels thought it would increase piracy. It’s been that way forever. The labels and film companies have fought technology from the beginning, they continue to do so now, and this has continued on and on and on.”
The pattern is the point. Every technological shift that threatened to reduce the industry’s role was met not with adaptation but with resistance.
What Artists Can Now Do Without Labels
Musicians today can record affordably, distribute worldwide, connect directly with listeners, sell merch, build email lists, run crowdfunding campaigns, manage fan memberships, and promote themselves without ever setting foot inside a major-label headquarters. The more independent creators take this route, the healthier the broader music ecosystem becomes.
The old justification for major-label control gets harder to defend every year. Artists can now hire or manage services once treated as label-only functions:
• digital distribution through independent platforms
• recording and production using affordable software such as Cubase, Ableton, GarageBand, and Logic
• direct fan outreach through social media, mailing lists, memberships, and crowdfunding
• marketing, promotion, licensing, and specialist services on a project-by-project basis
Financing, catalog ownership, global marketing, playlist relationships, licensing infrastructure, radio promotion, synchronization, data, and promotional scale can all be handled without Sony, Universal, or Warner — if artists stand up and acknowledge that the cyber universe was meant for music, and does not require long-term contracts with giant firms who, as the late Linkin Park singer Chester Bennington said, “have very little to do with the creative process of making music.”
Why the Majors Still Hold Power
Despite this modern arsenal, major labels retain enormous leverage because they dominate — or appear to dominate — key sectors that solo acts struggle to replicate.
That dominance did not happen by chance. Corporate labels built their stronghold through market control, price control, and tactics designed to choke off competition. They simultaneously convinced generations of performers that standard industry contracts were the only functional path forward.
But that mindset only survives as long as creators believe it. Once artists realize that more equitable, self-reliant models already exist, the machine loses its aura of permanence and becomes far easier to dismantle.
George Howard’s Argument: 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 like TuneCore and CD Baby proved artists could distribute music without traditional label structures. Howard also suggested the industry was only beginning to understand how social media would reshape music’s future — not merely that artists had new tools, but that those tools could break the old assumption that labels must stand between musicians and their audiences.
His central question deserves to be debated in forums around the globe: should any economic gatekeeper inserted between creator and audience ultimately take value out of that relationship?
The Radio Promotion Myth
One persistent myth is that labels create radio promotion. In practice, labels hand music to radio stations — the stations decide what to play and provide the actual exposure. Meanwhile, as Howard has pointed out, recording costs have collapsed compared to the era of analog tape, pressing plants, and physical retail.
So artists can hire whatever they actually need. They save money — potentially millions — and they choose what help they want, rather than letting corporations force intervention on them that they never asked for and don’t need.
Doing Less, Earning More
If labels are doing less while earning more, the question becomes unavoidable: why should so much money flow to companies with little involvement in the creative work?
And the major-label system is not shrinking. Global recorded-music revenue hit roughly $31.7 billion in 2025 — the eleventh consecutive year of growth. Streaming alone produced more than $22 billion, nearly 70% of recorded-music revenue. In the U.S., paid subscriptions generated about $6.4 billion.
The labels don’t need to make $70 million a day. That’s an insult. The money should be going to the people who do the creative work.
Two Different Questions
Can technology make a record label unnecessary for an individual artist? Absolutely. It already has, for some.
Will technology make the major labels themselves irrelevant? It could, and it should. But the labels have repeatedly acquired promising competitors only to bury them.
When will technology let the ordinary working musician — not just the superstar — build a commercially viable direct relationship with the people who value their work?
That world does not yet exist. Streaming eliminated one intermediary — the physical distributor and record store — but installed an enormous new one between musician and listener. Social media did something similar: an artist can theoretically reach everybody, but in practice algorithms, platforms, aggregators, recommendation systems, and ad markets decide who actually gets reached. That digital gatekeeper can be swept into the dustbin along with the major labels who pull the levers behind it.
The Unsolved Problem: The Artist–Fan Economy
The internet solved distribution more than twenty years ago. It has still not solved the musician’s economic relationship with the fan. That relationship remains the central problem.
What hasn’t arrived at scale is the missing layer:
Artist → discovery → trusted relationship → payment → continuing fan relationship
— with the artist retaining control of the customer relationship and very little value extracted in between. If someone genuinely solves that, especially for the vast middle class of musicians rather than Taylor Swift or Beyoncé, the structure of the record business could change dramatically.
A Fairer Model
The industry we’re proposing would look closer in spirit to YouTube, where creators receive a meaningful share of the revenue their work generates — a split commonly cited at around 55 percent. Whether that exact figure is right is debatable; the principle is not. The people who create the content should receive far more of the money than the major-label system gives them.
Many musicians likely receive less than a quarter of the income tied to the content they create. That imbalance isn’t just inefficient — it’s unfair to the artists whose labor, talent, and audiences make the industry possible.
A healthier music economy would use technology to strengthen the direct artist-to-listener connection:
• fans pay less, because fewer middlemen stand between them and the music
• artists earn more, because they keep a larger share of the value they create
• musicians build direct, lasting relationships with their audiences
• new tools help artists understand their markets and reach fans on their own terms
Musicians Must Organize
The Screen Actors Guild did this for people who toil for the major studios. The Guild gives them rights and loudly enforces them. No equivalent organization exists for musicians, songwriters, and their fans.
Imogen Heap had it right on the masthead of the Council of Music Makers: “Without musicians and the music they make, there can be no music industry.” Nowhere does she say the same about the major labels — because that would be a lie. Without the major labels, there would be a superior music industry.
Musicians are essential. With social media and tools that let them connect directly with fans and markets under their own control, they could rule the world. But the music industry will not change on its own. It must be changed by the force of musicians rallying together as one.
That is the purpose of Music2020: to give musicians a place for their voices to be heard.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.
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.