PDA

View Full Version : Youtube to remove all copywritten music



JoshM22
January 16th, 2009, 23:13
I am sure many of you here have heard that Youtube is removing all unauthorized music from the site. In other words all of your favorite artists music uploaded by a regular joe is being pulled from the site. Personally I think this will slightly hurt record companies business. I don't sit on youtube all day and listen to music for free. For one the music quality is complete crap.Secondly I like to have album artowork and some liner notes to read. Having the physical product is some what rewarding. Third I like to support my favorite artist. If you just download songs for free off torrents then your only hurting the artist. Youtube is a little different I think. It helps new fans listen to the music and determine if they will buy the record or buy the MP3. This is just my 2 cents on the subject. Anyone know if uploaded bootlegs will be taken down too?

the_EMU_kid
January 17th, 2009, 01:36
its ok for me first of buyn' an album i search for it anywhere rather then youtube like lastfm radios or similar

FatTrucker
January 17th, 2009, 21:29
Its more to do with licencing. At the moment if you want to use entertainment media that's subject to copyright in a public place or for public consumption then you need to purchase a licence to do so. Just like Radio stations, TV, pubs, clubs and anywhere else.

Legally Youtube are infringing copyright by hosting anything that's subject to copyright and they could technically be sued for royalties every single time someone views or listens to a clip, song or program.

So I think rather than it being a concerted effort to thwart piracy, in the current climate of music firms wielding a big stick all over the web, its probably more to do with protecting themself legally from any potential litigation on infringing content.

retroguiden
January 17th, 2009, 23:09
I am sure many of you here have heard that Youtube is removing all unauthorized music from the site. In other words all of your favorite artists music uploaded by a regular joe is being pulled from the site. Personally I think this will slightly hurt record companies business. I don't sit on youtube all day and listen to music for free. For one the music quality is complete crap.Secondly I like to have album artowork and some liner notes to read. Having the physical product is some what rewarding. Third I like to support my favorite artist. If you just download songs for free off torrents then your only hurting the artist. Youtube is a little different I think. It helps new fans listen to the music and determine if they will buy the record or buy the MP3. This is just my 2 cents on the subject. Anyone know if uploaded bootlegs will be taken down too?

Seriously. It's always the same reasons and excuses. Did you know people state the same reasons for torrents and DC-sharing as you just did about Youtube? I don't exactly see it as a human right to be able to listen to music on Youtube. (Come to think of it, I rarely use youtube for that reason either). I don't know about where you live, but here I can actually go to the recordstore and ask to listen to the record before I buy it. Sure, i have to get up and get out of my house to do it, but other than that it's not much different from Youtube, and much more fair to the copyright holders.

Sure, i agree there's a slight difference between Youtube and downloading MP3's - but not that much. The only difference that counts when you go down either road is what you do when you are finished listening to it. That's my 2 cents. :msn_wink:

Dude111
January 18th, 2009, 05:29
Youtube died when Google bought them..

alcoatjez
January 19th, 2009, 23:52
Youtube died when Google bought them..

Oh, how I like these great constructive responses :dry:
This is not a choice made by YouTube, they will face severe consequences when they don't do it.

IMHO FatTrucker got it all right. Here in Holland, a company that represents the record companies is trying to get money from supermarkets and even barbers for playing music in their stores...

Hrothgar
January 20th, 2009, 02:25
I've always personally disagreed with the crack-down on copyrighted material. Now in this case, youtube certainly didn't have a choice and can't be blamed for their actions. However I still disagree with record companies going after people for every cent any penny they can. Firstly, the artist gets most of their money from concerts and commercial marketing.

The world is simply changing. P2p transfers, torrents, and other exchange of information hasn't really hurt the music or movie industry at all. I still think if you truly enjoy a CD or a movie, then yes you should download it to boost sales. However I do not think a person should be persecuted as a criminal because they downloaded an album before buying it because they don't want to spend 10$ an album that turns out to be complete dog-crap.

Zach
January 20th, 2009, 18:52
I think the whole Piracy vs the RIAA is a moot point as time goes on.

The only thing prosecution of music proved to the RIAA is that if you do it to the public en masse, you are going to alienate customers, and bands learned the hard way (Metallica, et al) that if you sit there and act like everyone is stealing you music, you are going to drive your revenue into the ground because people won't buy your shit.

There has been no sustainable research to prove piracy has taken money away from the recording industry, that can actually be believed. The reason they are losing money is because

A. They put out the same shitty music all the time, same recycled garbage from auto-tuned teenagers who couldn't hold a note to save their life.

B. Alienation from anti piracy campaigns, legal actions, Sony root-kit debacle, etc.

The Internet is changing the scope of the music industry and putting more power back into the hands of the artists as it is. There are tons of sites where people can upload their music to be distributed for free, or for a decent fee. People can still preview more than 10 seconds of a track also.

That takes money out of the RIAA's pocket and they don't like it, and being spoiled greedy idiots they will do anything to recoup their losses, including suing 12 year olds for $10,000 or whatever.

When the RIAA finally goes under, or is forced to save itself via a radical restructuring or transformation of its business model, it will be because they failed as a viable industry. They saw the times, resisted change and REFUSED to adapt. When you put out the same shitty garbage it will always reach a point where people just stop buying. They may like it enough to steal it, but that's about it. If people don't feel like your product is worth the money, your business will fail.

There is a disturbing trend lately with not letting companies in the USA fail as it is.. Now there are some good reasons behind it, and many fine points to debate at how to do it, or how it could have been done better.. But there is no free market capitalism if businesses are not aloud to drive themselves into the ground.. I hope the RIAA is allowed to go down in flames when they finally reach the stages of final death, years from now. A new and better organization will step in and rebuild the recording industry in a manner consistent with the times and demands of fans. Hopefully they will rebuild it in such a manner that it can change and adapt as the times change too.


As far as Youtube, the law is the law.. Straight up putting music or videos of movies and TV shows or whatever on youtube is against the law. They have a right to do what they will with their service, but I think it is pure conjecture for us to say they were forced or not forced into obeying the law, and it is not their choice, etc.. Youtube has always had policies in line with the law, as it should be, stepping up enforcement isn't going to endager the popularity of the service at all.

You are still allowed by public use to do all kinds of things, such as AMV clips and all the other fan generated content that are projects based on one or many IP's. That kind of stuff is not going to dissappear but let's face it..

Most people just go to youtube to look at animals do stupid shit for 3 hours, or retarded people doing stupid stuff resulting in injury.. And watch other peoples emo ass video blogs about how shitty their life is and what's wrong with the world..

JoshM22
February 7th, 2009, 23:06
I've always personally disagreed with the crack-down on copyrighted material. Now in this case, youtube certainly didn't have a choice and can't be blamed for their actions. However I still disagree with record companies going after people for every cent any penny they can. Firstly, the artist gets most of their money from concerts and commercial marketing.

The world is simply changing. P2p transfers, torrents, and other exchange of information hasn't really hurt the music or movie industry at all. I still think if you truly enjoy a CD or a movie, then yes you should download it to boost sales. However I do not think a person should be persecuted as a criminal because they downloaded an album before buying it because they don't want to spend 10$ an album that turns out to be complete dog-crap.

Finally someone that agrees with me.

JoshM22
February 7th, 2009, 23:11
I think the whole Piracy vs the RIAA is a moot point as time goes on.

The only thing prosecution of music proved to the RIAA is that if you do it to the public en masse, you are going to alienate customers, and bands learned the hard way (Metallica, et al) that if you sit there and act like everyone is stealing you music, you are going to drive your revenue into the ground because people won't buy your shit.

There has been no sustainable research to prove piracy has taken money away from the recording industry, that can actually be believed. The reason they are losing money is because

A. They put out the same shitty music all the time, same recycled garbage from auto-tuned teenagers who couldn't hold a note to save their life.

B. Alienation from anti piracy campaigns, legal actions, Sony root-kit debacle, etc.

The Internet is changing the scope of the music industry and putting more power back into the hands of the artists as it is. There are tons of sites where people can upload their music to be distributed for free, or for a decent fee. People can still preview more than 10 seconds of a track also.

That takes money out of the RIAA's pocket and they don't like it, and being spoiled greedy idiots they will do anything to recoup their losses, including suing 12 year olds for $10,000 or whatever.

When the RIAA finally goes under, or is forced to save itself via a radical restructuring or transformation of its business model, it will be because they failed as a viable industry. They saw the times, resisted change and REFUSED to adapt. When you put out the same shitty garbage it will always reach a point where people just stop buying. They may like it enough to steal it, but that's about it. If people don't feel like your product is worth the money, your business will fail.

There is a disturbing trend lately with not letting companies in the USA fail as it is.. Now there are some good reasons behind it, and many fine points to debate at how to do it, or how it could have been done better.. But there is no free market capitalism if businesses are not aloud to drive themselves into the ground.. I hope the RIAA is allowed to go down in flames when they finally reach the stages of final death, years from now. A new and better organization will step in and rebuild the recording industry in a manner consistent with the times and demands of fans. Hopefully they will rebuild it in such a manner that it can change and adapt as the times change too.


As far as Youtube, the law is the law.. Straight up putting music or videos of movies and TV shows or whatever on youtube is against the law. They have a right to do what they will with their service, but I think it is pure conjecture for us to say they were forced or not forced into obeying the law, and it is not their choice, etc.. Youtube has always had policies in line with the law, as it should be, stepping up enforcement isn't going to endager the popularity of the service at all.

You are still allowed by public use to do all kinds of things, such as AMV clips and all the other fan generated content that are projects based on one or many IP's. That kind of stuff is not going to dissappear but let's face it..

Most people just go to youtube to look at animals do stupid shit for 3 hours, or retarded people doing stupid stuff resulting in injury.. And watch other peoples emo ass video blogs about how shitty their life is and what's wrong with the world..

This you say is very true. It will take a long time for You Tube to take down all the copyrighted music. Once it happens people like myself will learn to live with it. Until then people enjoy all the copyrighted music you can.

xplics
February 16th, 2009, 17:36
I have not heard about this until actually seeing this on the forum here. However this would explain why a few of my videos in my favorites on youtube are soundless and have a paragraph in red under the video.

Frankestien
April 19th, 2011, 09:10
Youtube died when Google bought them..

Buddy you are wrong..!!
Youtube itself is a big search engine for finding any videos you want and it can never be dead..!!!

Frasesdeamor9
January 9th, 2012, 08:04
youtube done very well to remove all duplicate music

NewAgeRetroHippie
March 25th, 2012, 15:59
For those unsure: YouTube doesn't particularly care unless a label or something flags your video for infringement.

peterjones0021
July 4th, 2015, 06:14
I've always personally disagreed with the crack-down on copyrighted material. Now in this case, youtube certainly didn't have a choice and can't be blamed for their actions. However I still disagree with record companies going after people for every cent any penny they can. Firstly, the artist gets most of their money from concerts and commercial marketing.