TuneCore Falsely Advertises Royalties
Didn't plan to post this, but it really irked me. @TuneCore advertises 100% royalties but in actuality takes a 20% cut on anything YouTube, even when others (ie @Distrokid) only take from Content-ID. This means YouTube Music as well, which is supposed to be YouTube's answer to Spotify.
TuneCore seems generally behind the times - starting unlimited uploads only recently vs many competitors doing this for years, content-id whitelisting still requiring manual emails, etc. But now it seems to also not know YouTube, YT Music, and YT content-id are different things.
At first, I thought it was an oversight on their pricing webpage, but their support team just doubles down on all revenue from YouTube being the same thing and subject to a 20% cut.
Sadly, there seems to be no reading comprehension of their website completely contradicting their admission of taking a 20% cut, even when quoted to them. It also really doesn't make sense why an agreement with YouTube has any impact on what they choose to pass on to the artist.
As a sanity check, I thought maybe YouTube is like this for all distributors but a quick email to Distrokid confirmed it was just TuneCore that was lumping all Youtube revenue together with its 20% content id cut.
The bigger problem here is TuneCore is just straight-up breaking the law - they are advertising 100%, but it's not true. Most likely they fix this eventually, but given how long it took them just to acknowledge the new pricing model everyone has been using + how slow they are with customer support in general (manual support tickets for whitelisting content-id, etc), it doesn't seem like it'll be a priority for them any time soon.
TuneCore seems generally behind the times - starting unlimited uploads only recently vs many competitors doing this for years, content-id whitelisting still requiring manual emails, etc. But now it seems to also not know YouTube, YT Music, and YT content-id are different things.
At first, I thought it was an oversight on their pricing webpage, but their support team just doubles down on all revenue from YouTube being the same thing and subject to a 20% cut.
Sadly, there seems to be no reading comprehension of their website completely contradicting their admission of taking a 20% cut, even when quoted to them. It also really doesn't make sense why an agreement with YouTube has any impact on what they choose to pass on to the artist.
As a sanity check, I thought maybe YouTube is like this for all distributors but a quick email to Distrokid confirmed it was just TuneCore that was lumping all Youtube revenue together with its 20% content id cut.
The bigger problem here is TuneCore is just straight-up breaking the law - they are advertising 100%, but it's not true. Most likely they fix this eventually, but given how long it took them just to acknowledge the new pricing model everyone has been using + how slow they are with customer support in general (manual support tickets for whitelisting content-id, etc), it doesn't seem like it'll be a priority for them any time soon.
160 unique view(s)
