YouTube Is About To Delete Independent Artists From Its Site

a reply to: ArchPlayer

I can't figure out why Youtube is so hot to compete with Spotify. Spotify only makes money by bilking idiots out of angel funding, near as I can tell. The actual artists, as usual, get paid squat under the Spotify model, while Internet Goofballs rake in millions in capital investment, which they promptly spend on the kind of garbage Silly-Con valley morons are best known for: Foosball tables, Electric Hot Rods, and OOP back issues of their favorite comic books.

Still -- I doubt the situation is as dire as Forbes predicts. Schlock lovers will flock to the new site, but weasel out of paying for anything, and actual music lovers will get their fix directly. Same as it ever was.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Sensationalist inaccurate propaganda masquerading as reporting. Many independent labels have agreed to YT/google's new conditions. Those that don't 'are making a choice not to do so. And it's a free market - so there's little to stop someone starting up a video service with whatever conditions they like and using various means such as twitter and FB & redditt, etc to market it.

It isn't a free market when you bogard and bully someone into doing your bidding or ELSE.
So what many indie labels that are known (hence not really indie but that hybrid indie controlled by the industry) agreed to this. What about the little guy in his basement still pressing his own materials one at a time with one DVD drive and he is trying to run his label. I mean if Russell Simmons was trying to start Def Jam under these circumstances now with a bunch of unknowns they would box them out.

It's not a choice when its our way or the highway and some small fries can't afford this. Some folks don't want to grow to the size and power of a Universal or Sony. That is why small time labels back in the day were so special. They were small enough to focus on the artists they had with special care and still compete. You didn't see Atlantic Records or Columbia Records pulling these types of tactics with a Giant Records or Zodiac Records. That was still the good ol' days of regional artists and hits being ENOUGH.

Having to rely on Facebook or Twitter is not solving the problem. These companies are in the back pockets and back deals with these maniacs. What happens when facebook decides to ban videos that don't come from YouTube?

It can happen.

a reply to: smurfy

Spot on that is exactly what I'm talking about.
Youtube is more than just a video hobby. I learned a lot about playing bass from it as an instructional tool, learned some cool photoshop stuff, the whole shabang and all of a sudden these millions of people that have participated and built it up as a resource of free learning and sharing of classics are going to tear it down.

Ante Up Folks.

a reply to: yuppa
a reply to: DukeEligos

It's more than a notion to find enough servers to cover the bandwidth to contain that amount of streaming data that can buffer in real time and handle thousands at once uploading and playing content.

The more I think about this the more I think that this also could be trying to force people into the cloud as well, so they can ensure you're not cheating the system and doing your own thing.

ATS couldn't get into that thing....look how much youtube has saturated everybody, do we not hae a Youtube button? I think so. This is bigger than we think.

Either way it sucks donkey balls.

a reply to: Unity_99

Hell no. I mean look at how they treat their emailers. Forced cell number for "secure access" for an email account. Banning the email if you send one too many emails as "spammers account". It will be FAR FAR worse. Yahoo hasn't been beyond anything worth a damn since 1999. Ain't worth the spit it takes to cuss it.

a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

I disagree. I never would have discovered people like Jon Gomm doing things like Fingerstyle Ain't Nobody by Rufus and Chaka Khan without it. Covers are what the music industry is built on. Go all the way back to the 1920s and you can follow how many people started doing "standards". Love For Sale, Willow Weep For Me, Body and Soul, Round Midnight, Bridge Over Troubled Water....artists have to start somewhere.

You and I may think Psy is a retard, but he shouldn't be censored because we don't like him. He has his market let him have it. At least he's being his own entrepreneur and not held by the tight and curlys by the industry maggots.

I think this will hurt not only indie artists but hobbyists that make parody videos, do video game tutorials, and the like. You censor one the hammer comes down on all.

I can't figure out why Youtube is so hot to compete with Spotify. Spotify only makes money by bilking idiots out of angel funding, near as I can tell. The actual artists, as usual, get paid squat under the Spotify model, while Internet Goofballs rake in millions in capital investment, which they promptly spend on the kind of garbage Silly-Con valley morons are best known for: Foosball tables, Electric Hot Rods, and OOP back issues of their favorite comic books. Still -- I doubt the situation is as dire as Forbes predicts. Schlock lovers will flock to the new site, but weasel out of paying for anything, and actual music lovers will get their fix directly. Same as it ever was.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Google as a whole wants to dominate the entire market. They want the big brother control. As I said earlier, its bigger than the money. They are trying to pull a Universal type move and be able to control what anyone sees or hears. They have intergrated their video channel into the marketplace so well, the shock of it will be worse than Forbes predicts. Idiots trained to youtube - something now connected under this all for one bull# that google has now, will be getting hit hard. I don't think they give 2 #s about the money to tell you the truth.

Think about what happened when everybody went after Napster which back then was truly a college head's innocent dream of sharing. Then look what happened to Limewire and Kazaa. Then Rhapsody. Then Oink - that was a MAJOR blow. Hell, even the Nine Inch Nails guys were on Oink. That was the world's biggest collective of music, shared by all for all. Music lovers still haven't recovered. Some of the rarest gems in the world people transferred over just to have it there. Then Demonoid....every hit gets worse and worse.

I hate the current copywrite laws.

I hope someone creates a website that's open source where videos can be uploaded and the user controls ad content. Maybe make it to where people are paid in bitcoins so it can't be tracked by greedy assholes who use the law to keep the masses from exercising freedom on any level.

I am tired of this #.

You can't even make a documentary without having to get permission from everyone and their cousin.

a reply to: OrphanApology

I hate the current copywrite laws. I hope someone creates a website that's open source where videos can be uploaded and the user controls ad content. Maybe make it to where people are paid in bitcoins so it can't be tracked by greedy assholes who use the law to keep the masses from exercising freedom on any level. I am tired of this #. You can't even make a documentary without having to get permission from everyone and their cousin.

Spot on there Orphan. As an artist I hate the copyright laws too. When you copyright, somebody can still come after you and trademark and in some instances patent your IDEAS. People think I'm tripping about this but I've seen it happen. All they have to change is a word or two. Poor man's copyright holds no weight either. And then the entire process is irrelevant overseas - bootlegging is ALIVE AND WELL in England. Hell, you can't even turn things you've copyrighted over to public domain. I had to get a lawyer and spend a lot of money doing it on my first collection of writings to undo a copyright I did at 16 to put in the public domain. The LOC fought me every step of the way. Took almost seven years and then, it was like a sin.

Yes, you can't even make a documentary without paying more than you would on a Hollywood film these days and even if you get artist support, if they are affiliated with a label you still have to pay and deal with drama.

a reply to: smurfy

Hey Smurfy your post got me to thinking...how long before Youtube starts charging for this:


How many people use YouTube as a safeguard to show injustice. How many ATSers use Youtube as a sole source of information? A lot of people have put a hell of a lot of information (and to be fair disinformation) on the site for us to have instant access to. We have seen ALOT of injustices and been able to use it as "burden of proof" on many human rights violations and civil liberty infringements. Now all of a sudden we have to pay for the privilege? Not just Americans....people the world over USE IT.

Yep, the NSA is probably busting the biggest nut in the world right now. And as usual everybody will take it on the chin per diem. I don't think anything will be able to replace it. End of an era.

Isn't this whole story talking about record labels? "Independent artists" as in those signed to indie labels? As far as I can see there is and will be nothing to stop people uploading their own music as private individuals. It's just that if labels want to sign up to the music channel then they have to pay.

So don't worry, the next Justin Bieber will still be able to upload his bedroom music vids — there's an encouraging thought

Zero care factor in the whole scheme of things. The digital age is about to meet its deserved death. Yeeehah

originally posted by: Rob48
Isn't this whole story talking about record labels? "Independent artists" as in those signed to indie labels? As far as I can see there is and will be nothing to stop people uploading their own music as private individuals. It's just that if labels want to sign up to the music channel then they have to pay.

So don't worry, the next Justin Bieber will still be able to upload his bedroom music vids — there's an encouraging thought

It starts there but once you get into the article it starts talking about individual indie artists as well and THAT is the kicker of the OP.

So while I hate Predator Bieber, he may not be able to upload from his bedroom music videos.

a reply to: ArchPlayer

A few people on other sites have brought yahoo up and are already planning on switching. Whatever is going to happen, google needs to have its nose rubbed in the pile of doo doo and people will need to use another site one that is going to gain in popularity.

originally posted by: jude11
Solution?

Someone will create another youtube for just this purpose.

They can't stop creativity, artists, musicians from sharing and trying to earn a living just because they say so.

And the new site will rock!

My opinion.

Peace

That is were the undoing of net neutrality comes in to ensure the current Oligopolies maintain their status.

You go and create this awesome You tube site which becomes popular overnight. The next day you come to find out its ridiculous slow. So slow that people just stop visiting it .

Make an independent Youtube and post independent music there instead.

Oh, the irony.

a reply to: ArchPlayer

the world is going to h*ll in a handbasket and I guess youtube getting rid of cr*ppy artists is our biggest problem.

Party on!

#11

a reply to: reploid

PS - The world has always been "hell in a handbasket." Art is the only thing that has ever given it any meaning.