Indie labels are shaking down YouTube for a fair deal in their imminent music streaming service. Artists like Exploding in Sound’s Grass Is Green will probably come out satisfied no matter what, since their distributor is associated with Universal. Other indie labels and bands will have to fight a little harder for equality. Illustration by Deanna Archetto.

It was inevitable. YouTube was bound to jump on the music streaming subscription service bandwagon with Amazon, Spotify, Rdio, and more. In this process, YouTube has to sign deals with any record label it wants to include, no matter how big or small. But what’s fair for the majors isn’t always fair for the indies.

Right now, rumors are circulating about what would happen to music on labels that do not agree to YouTube’s non-negotiable deal to include indie music on their subscription-based music streaming service. Digital Music News posted an early leaked version of YouTube’s deal. It gave 55% of revenue to the labels, but also enables “YouTube to lower its rate of pay to indies if major labels agreed to a lower rate as well.” An article published on Forbes said something much worse could happen, like the complete removal of content from indie labels who refuse to cooperate with YouTube’s terms.

Brooklyn-based record label Exploding in Sound said their artists, like Krill and Ovlov, are protected from otherwise unfair deals. Their distributor works with The Orchard, the official music distribution partner for YouTube. But what if these seemingly small, independent labels were not part of larger distribution groups?

Dan Goldin from Exploding in Sound said they would not pay the price of an unfair deal to have their music included in a YouTube streaming service. “That just doesn’t seem like [something we’d do] as far as I’m concerned. I still think it’s strange that people go to YouTube to listen to music. But that’s just me, I guess,” said Goldin.

After all, there’s Vimeo, Bandcamp, Soundcloud, and many more ways that indie labels and anyone else can use to access music. Seth Decoteau and Kevin Duquette of Topshelf Records in Peabody, MA know that music listeners have preferences. “We see all streaming as ‘I want my stuff on as much as I can.’ It’s a reach thing,” said Decoteau.

The artists on Topshelf Records, like The World Is a Beautiful Place & I Am No Longer Afraid to Die and You Blew It!  are in a similarly “fortunate position” to Exploding in Sound, said co-founders Seth Decoteau and Kevin Duquette. Their deal with YouTube will be more fair because their distributor, Caroline, works with Universal, one of the major labels who have already agreed to YouTube’s terms.

Decoteau said that if they weren’t associated with Universal in some way, “I don’t think they [YouTube] would even talk to us.”

Topshelf Records said they want to provide all opportunities to get their artists’ music out there, but the deals have to be fair. You won’t find Topshelf Records on Amazon Prime Music for this reason. “Amazon is flexing their muscle and we’re not partaking in that because it’s a crap deal,” said Duquette.

“I consider myself optimistic on the streaming premise,” said Hunter Mack of Gold Robot Records. His small Oakland, CA label, home to artists like Young Hunting and Yalls, is making the move to Boston this summer, but they haven’t seen the large payouts that streaming services have promised. For more popular mainstream artists, streaming makes sense. But for smaller artists, Mack said, “It just takes some time for these new avenues to work out.”

“In any case, I imagine we will be involved if/when YouTube launches a streaming service,” said Mack. In fact, in an email to Allston Pudding, Mack said that Gold Robot’s digital distributor, Redeye, is currently in negotiations with YouTube.

Artists on Father/Daughter Records, like Bent Shapes, are also distributed by Redeye, and said that Redeye is working to make sure YouTube’s streaming service is “fair to all labels across the board.” Like Mack, Jessi Frick of Father/Daughter said she agrees that that means equal treatment on streaming revenue their artists may get from YouTube.

“The way I see it, streaming isn’t a revenue stream that can financially sustain a label so for us, we look at it as a marketing tool, a means of discovery. You never know when someone will get the impulse to listen to something,” said Frick.

Frick sees it this way:“If we’re all utilizing the same platform and tools, why should one label’s royalty rate be more than another?”

There is still a lot to iron out in terms of what indie labels will do and how they will fair in this latest music streaming service.

“We’re lucky that the strength of the indies has grown two fold over the past 10 to 20 years and we have much more clout than the pre-streaming era,” said Frick. “It will be a real shame for all parties involved, including consumers, if we can’t come to a resolution.” ■