<i>"...because I earned less for a year's work..."</i><p>Yeah, I'm sure he was working hard full-time for those royalties. Not that he doesn't deserve royalties, but I think it's a falsification to consider waiting for a royalty check to come in, "work".
"Waterman, whose fortune was estimated at £47 million by The Times in 2004, compared this treatment to the "exploitation" of migrant workers in the Middle East."<p>I like this line.<p>Presumably Waterman signed a contract with his publisher that allowed his song to be played by Google. If that contract is exploitative, surely that's his publisher's fault (or his own, for signing it), not Google's.
> compared this treatment to the "exploitation" of migrant workers in the Middle East.<p>Oh, how so? Were you at risk of death or physical injury? Were you living in disgusting, slave-like conditions? Were you working 14+ hour days and barely getting enough money to survive?
How many 'never gonna give you up' tracks were sold on iTunes since Rick Roll versus before Rick Roll?<p>I bet sales of that song went through the roof.