1. ER Erasmus Research Centre for MeCC Media, Communication and Culture ERIK HITTERS & WES WIERDA EXPANDING ISOMORPHISM; THE CASE OF THE DUTCH MUSIC PUBLISHING INDUSTRY

4. 1.Partially owns the right to exploit compositions 2.“A music publisher's business concept is to control an intellectual property portfolio, and to license songs from this portfolio to several clients” (Leyshon, 2001) 3.“Speculative asset” (Caves, 2000) 4.Operations spread far beyond the music industry’s value chain 5.Gatekeeping functions

6. Scout & financier of talent Creative matchmaker NetworkerDealmaker Administrator

7. Legal basis: Berner Convention 1889 & Authoring Right 1912 Dominance of sheet music until 1950 1913 Dutch Collecting Societies  2/3 author  1/3 music publisher My argument: Throughout history MPI has become used to internal and external threaths (eg. copying). Their relative invisibility is essential for their continued success

8. Theoretical Framework: Dynamic Market Transformation Model Economic Conditions Music culture Technology Legal opportuni ties Entrepre- neurship Source: Wierda & Hitters 2013

9. 1. Edition Papier 2. Music Publishers United 3. Crisis, war and resurrection 4. Music genre revolution 6. Rights industry Renaissance (1912- 1929) (before 1912) ( 1929- 1950) (1952- 1980) (1984- 1998 ) 5. Oligopoly & catalogue value (1998- now ) Legal Technology Economics Culture Technology Regime name Driver Time

10. Incasso Buma Stemra in miljoen € (1950-1980). Bron: F. van Bronswijk, Witbraad, 2007)

12. Incasso Buma Stemra (1981-2000) Bron: F. van Bronswijk Buma-Stemra 1930-1965, C. Witbraad. Buma/Stemra sedert 1913

15. Performing & mechanical rights 2010-2014 (source annual report Buma/Stemra, 2015)

16. Theoretically informed by the logics of institutional behavior (Di Maggio & Powell, 1983) Coercive isomorphism both formal and informal pressures exerted on organizations by other organizations and by cultural expectations from society Memitic isomorphism tendency of an organization to imitate another organization's structure, as a result of uncertainty Normative isomorphism professionalization as the collective struggle of members of an occupation

17. Specific MP Industries conditions The abundance of supply and scarcity of demand The power position of gatekeepers (Negus, 2002; Peterson & Berger, 1975). General lack of transparency about the intermediary position of music publishers, deals and connections Relative obscurity: both among users, composers and other parts of the music industries there is little knowledge about music publishing Entrepreneurial drive to maximise rights revenues

18. Isomorphistic industry process Mimetic Imitation of best practices: a ‘trade practice’ of industry peers came into being Coercive A rigorous copyright regime with high entry barriers Industry reaction: legal innovation Normative Protection and conserving of standards: revenue maximization, fundblocking Opportunistic Isomorphism

19. When does Opportunistic Isomorphism appear? In a non-transparent market In an oligopolistic industry In a legally complex environment for both consumers and the industry itself.  Exploring and sometimes pushing back of (ethical) boundaries

20. Music publishers always operated as ‘rights exploiters’ and ‘legal innovators’ The music publishing business forms recognizable patterns over time. They have secured their position in the “value creating ecology” of the music business The sheltered position of publishing companies allows them to explore/push back boundaries. But: –Publishers are still fairly well off, despite shrinking market –Opportunistic isomorphism may harm the music industry –Copyrights may serve as a protection for creatives / public intervention needed