YouTube to start removing videos with indie label music (Radiohead included)

[Shane Essary]

The fact that 90% have signed the contract tells me the deal is probably fair?

Not necessarily as I seriously doubt Google has contacted each and every band out there, but rather the publishers that represent them.  For example, my band goes through various distributors, including but not limited to CD Baby.  Since CD Baby acts as our publisher, they only have to work with CD Baby since we agreed to let CD Baby handle that aspect of those particular releases.  CD Baby has something like 3-4 million tracks in their catalog with the same agreements.  Tunecore has a similar number and agreement, and The Orchard has probably even more.  Between those 3 catalogs, that's well over 10 million tracks right there (disclaimer:  I'm a software dev for a digital music service and I'm directly involved with the ingestion of those catalogs).  A huge chunk of the rest of the indie bands come through labels that are under the Merlin agreement, who handles reporting and publishing for those.  

Chances are, the indie bands themselves aren't even involved in this discussion and it wouldnt' surprise me if the vast majority are even aware of what's going on.  They just want to create music and collect their non-existent royalty checks.

[Boumba]

That's what happens when you let Americans rule the world!

[JESEOS CHRIST]

 

If there was a bullet-proof way for filmmakers, amateur and pro alike to license commercial music instantly and easily with the click of a button and the payment of a one off $50.

Does Cuesongs come pretty close to accomplishing that?

http://www.cuesongs.com/

[JESEOS CHRIST]

That's what happens when you let Americans rule the world!

 

It can't be reduced to an "American" thing, IMO.

Though, this might be a shade of capitalism run amok.

With this issue as well as many other issues that stem from the corporate takeover of net neutrality, I don't think the public's level of urgency is high enough. Wait, let me rephrase that, I don't think the American public's level of urgency is high enough.

Maybe if more American citizens made themselves aware of the situation at hand and got involved, then to your point, Americans (the majority - i.e. 98%) ruling the world may not be such a bad thing. At least as it pertains to securing freedom and access to information.

[Axel]

That's what happens when you let Americans rule the world!

 

It can't be reduced to an "American" thing, IMO.

 

Right. It's western capitalism, founded on a nation-independant european mindset that their 'culture' is the most advanced and that all others need to assimilate anyway. 

 

Maybe if more American citizens made themselves aware of the situation at hand and got involved, then to your point, Americans (the majority - i.e. 98%) ruling the world may not be such a bad thing. At least as it pertains to securing freedom and access to information.

 

Don't you think the freedom has become rather relative insofar as access to information is (I am sure), er, guided by big companies (recently I accidentally downloaded 'Genieo' which disguised itself as a midi-editor software, my start-up homepage was then filled with all goods I ever remember to have seen reviews of or visited their homepages, it was a shock, took some time to get rid of it)?

Isn't it like the conspiracy theorizer's nightmare, 'MindHead' (Bowfinger) acting in open daylight?

 

Also, as I see it, you are free to say your irrelevant opinion on something, but you shall not act accordingly, challenging 'our' way of life.

[Orangenz]

1) Youtube does pay per view. It's not like facebook where you have to pay facebook in order to get people to view your content.

2) How big does the equipment on youtube need to be to do what they do? What percentage of the world's hard-drives are owned and used by Google and Youtube?

3) It's a platform. Almost all of the Youtube channels I follow use the channel to promote various things like a) their own products for sale b) friendly advertisers who approach them privately c) in support of other things they do. I don't think any of them try to make an income from google ads alone.

 

So that was in defense. On the other side:

1) They pinged one of my videos for having someone's music in it when it was wind blowing on the mic. Still not resolved two months later. Not good enough.

2) They ping my videos when I have paid for music like from Neumann.

3) There really could be better options for putting videos up with sync music. But

 

COPYRIGHT KILLS CREATIVITY

 

And that's not our copyright, it's the corporation copyright. Disney et al. He copied everyone but then changed the laws so people couldn't copy his stuff that he'd copied.

[leeys]

Right. It's western capitalism, founded on a nation-independant european mindset that their 'culture' is the most advanced and that all others need to assimilate anyway. 

 

I doubt it's Western either - give the Chinese half a chance and you'll see something similar, if not worse! It's just... capitalism. And human greed.

[Axel]

I doubt it's Western either - give the Chinese half a chance and you'll see something similar, if not worse! It's just... capitalism. And human greed.

 

Capitalism (of global dimensions) best prospers in democratic societies, something that Putin and the chinese 'communists' will soon learn. Their days are numbered, as are those of the islamists.

 

The idea of freedom (does it really mean plurality and more chances for the individual, I mean the individual individual, who doesn't strive just to assmimilate himself?) is a tsunami that tears away every resistance on the long run. It's funny how we can believe that we live in free countries, as long as it is unthinkable to restrict the power of companies like Google, Apple asf. 

 

Not the american people rule the world, not the president, not the military. We are all highly indebted. The banks own us. We start to become obsolete.

[maxotics]

I remember reading as a kid that the reason Ringo Star was asked to join the Beatles was that he owned a drum set (his family had money).  That made complete sense to me.  When I got interested in music an electric guitar, like a Fender Stratocaster was at least $300.  I remember buying a used Les Paul 20th Anniversery model for $300 (long, long ago sold).  That was in the late 1970s.  Today, you can buy a decent knockoff of those guitars for a little over a hundred.  Until the 1990s, getting into music was very expensive.  You had to mow a lot of lawns!  And being able to record, produce and distribute your own record--almost unheard of.   I think I've lived through one of the most dramatic changes in the economics of Art since man first beat on a drum.  That said, NOTHING HAS REALLY CHANGED.  The population has grown from 2 billion to over 6 billion in the past 50 years.  Staggering.  

 

You think it's bad that musicians get squeezed out of royalties.  Look around.  Massive amount of student debt, credit cards, no job security, pensions.  But again, more of the same.

 

The good news is that when a new technology comes out the early adopters have a chance to gain an audience that is there more for curiosity than anything else.  In fact, a band, for example, is always out-gunned when it wants to compete against other new bands AND ESPECIALLY the existing bands trying to protect their small toe-hold (by out-touring them, etc).  YouTube may close a door, but a window will be opened somewhere else :)

[Christina Ava]

listening to music through youtube is like eating the best french cuisine from a dumpster.

 

youtube was quite fun 10 years ago,before the ads, the wait till i load crap, the killing of anonimity, blackmailing you to sign up for that google+, keeping histories of what you browsed 

plus the bad sound-image quality lag and sea of trolls trolling trolls.

 

i dont think i have uploaded any videos there, and although i lose clients, i prefer to re-direct them to vimeo. 

 

check this about google blackmail: http://digg.com/video/google-is-going-to-blackmail-you

 

p.s check this interesting chart about the % of indy music 

 

 from phonofile.com/

[Axel]

check this about google blackmail: http://digg.com/video/google-is-going-to-blackmail-you

 

Supposed to be a satire, but don't think you can keep a secret. Maybe Google doesn't take advantage of all those personal informations yet (can you believe that?), but just the fact that it practically owns them is clearly wrong. Without much resistance, we allowed the Matrix to take control over us. Wake up, Neo!

[Rolf Silber]

This is how it works:

 

"Pirates" open the harbours and lands (in this case the realms of creativity) under the flag of creative/information freedom - they destroy in the process the idea of creative ownership and/or that people should pay the artist for what he/she does - they attack the "old industries" and call them "content mafia" - they "sell" the pirated content by building a coalition with the advertising industry and later with the labels which run for cover under the attack (you can also call it extortion) - they keep the most of the money and get even bigger ... and the moment they are big enough (now), they put the pirate costumes away, bring out their pin-striped suits, send their lobbyists to town .... and then they kick us all in the behind, having become mega-industries themselves and show all of us the finger.

 

Brave new world - 2.0.

[maxotics]

From the moment of your first breath, you're born with an "inheritance".  It may be money, looks, talent.  It may be none of those but at least you're born in a rich country.  In my experience, those who speak the loudest about injustice are usually those with trust funds.  If you really are "kicked in the behind" you don't see that as unusual, that's your starting point.  You work on succeeding at what you want to do, let's say music.  You don't have time to do anything else.  It is what it is.

 

In my experience, people who talk the loudest do the least in changing anything.  They have the time and money to look superior by pointing out the "faults" in others (or vague systems like capitalism and lobbying, etc.)

 

Anyone who has really tried to "kick against the pricks", who has put their family comfort on the line, knows the truth.  If you fight for justice you do it alone, more alone than most people can conceive, because again, few do it.  No one EVER thanks you.  No one ever understands why you would spend time fixing the world for others instead of making things better for yourself.   No one really believes that corporations are evil.  Corporations don't kill music.  People who work at corporation kill music, if they indeed do.

 

If you fired the CEO from Universal Music and had everything vote for a new way of doing business it would end up being the same way as the first way, protect or increase the income for the 7,000 employees.  7,000 people probably just like you.

[fuzzynormal]

That's what happens when you let Americans rule the world!

 

Ha ha.  As if Americans have any monopoly on unethical business practices!  

 

Welcome to human nature, where people exploit other people.  There are no boundaries in this regard.

 

And, point of fact, Americans barely even rule themselves much less the world.

[Clayton Moore]

Back in the day before on line, bands played locally, then regionally -- might be 5 or 10  years --- IF they are good, in time they get some recognition that takes them to larger cities and at some point maybe label deal or an invite to open for a national act and their off and running.

 

Honestly, if you take the huge label out of the deal and insert the ability to self publish and distribute then you have something.  But NOTHING can replace years of a true talent honing their craft in front of a live audience, while building a fan base period.

 

Also if we see NEW lables emerge that understand how to use new media to market and distribute and are fair on the royalty split that would be good.  I recently saw a contract that was still padded for......wait for it ......... "breakage" ......... as it physical record breakage.  That one was burried deep of course but ..... wow!!

[sunyata]

http://www.bandcamp.com

[pask74]

The artists themselves.  Just like filmmaking, it's not expensive to do these days.

I'd be interested to know what you actually know of the process of music making.

I'm a sound engineer and music producer by profession and know firsthand that except for bedroom electronic styles of music, all the rest will take lots of time (composing, writing, rehearsing, recording, promoting, etc.), energy of course and also professionals (recording studios, etc.) to deliver a product that is up to nowadays' standards.

[pask74]

At least as it pertains to securing freedom and access to information.

This would be a good starting point for some sort of dispute ;-)

[pask74]

YouTube may close a door, but a window will be opened somewhere else :)

Show me where. The music business has been in a crisis for the last 10 years and no real solution has been found yet.

The more time passes, the more young generations grow with this idea that music is actually free.

I'll be willing to work as a sound engineer for free if my rent, food, insurance, taxes, transportation costs etc. are free as well.

The fundamental problem is that people consume for free something that took an investment to be created.

Just as if McDonald's had been forced for over 10 years to give away their burgers. Who would go to Wendy's and pay for food?

[maxotics]

Show me where. The music business has been in a crisis for the last 10 years and no real solution has been found yet.

The more time passes, the more young generations grow with this idea that music is actually free.

I'll be willing to work as a sound engineer for free if my rent, food, insurance, taxes, transportation costs etc. are free as well.

The fundamental problem is that people consume for free something that took an investment to be created.

Just as if McDonald's had been forced for over 10 years to give away their burgers. Who would go to Wendy's and pay for food?

 

I didn't mean a solution where everyone can work in music/film who wants to; only a new, inexpensive way in, for a smart, determined or lucky few.  

 

pask74, if you could wave your magic want and eliminate all free music we would go back to the 70s, which I remember, and young people would start to listen to the same music over and over and over again.  It would make it even more difficult for new bands to gain an audience.  Everyone, young people especially, only have a limited amount of money to spend.  It's not like the 16-year-old has money stashed under his mattress he can pull out to pay for music he stole ;)

 

Whatever money people have to spend that trickles down to sound engineers is already being spent.  The question isn't about how many sound engineers can make a living, the question is allocation of engineering budgets (for 100 bands or 10,000?)

 

When I was young the Olympics meant rich white people with an interest in sports.  The "amateur" thing was actually exclusionary.  Then it was changed and penniless runners from Africa were able raise air-fare (from sponsors) and win races.  Yet today, most people who want to make a living as an athlete can't.  Economic structures change, but people always seem to re-create a star system. (In the Olympics, from trust funds to corporate sponsors).

 

What young people have trouble seeing is that EVERYONE wants to be someone.  No one WANTS to work in McDonalds.  How can everyone make a living then, in the arts?  If you want to be a sound engineer at your local church, or for corporate events, I'm pretty sure you can get those jobs.  

 

My parents pushed me into the Arts.  I worked in Hollywood for a few years, but came to my own conclusion that it wasn't for me (which I won't bore you with).  I'm pushing my kids into the Arts too, because I think all young people should pursue what they're interested because later in life you know too much ;)

 

Others have suggested in this thread, and I agree, that if you really, really want it, you can make a living in the Arts.  HOWEVER, it won't be a life you imagined as a young person.  I love the series Entourage because it makes show business realistic enough, shows just enough failure, to make the life-style seem plausible and attainable.  In real life you don't know if there's going to be a "next" episode.  So after a while most people make choices that give them more security.

 

Finally, as I tell my kids, all professionals ultimately make a living working in a narrow formula.  This is true for actors, singers, etc.  Yes, occasionally they'll go out and experiment.  But for the most part, we pay for what we can expect.  When my wife and I watch the "Good Wife" we expect a well-written character drama.  The artist on the show may want to do a torture scene out of "Scandal", but if they did I'd stop watching.  If I bought a Radio-head album and it was full of hard-core punk rock I'd probably wouldn't by their next album.  In short, all Art becomes a "Job".  That isn't necessarily a bad thing.  The life of Mick Jagger and your local high school principal isn't as dissimilar as it looks.

 

But I'm getting ahead of the story .... :)