It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Embedding a YouTube Video May Cost You a Bundle in ASCAP Bills

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate

Embedding a YouTube Video May Cost You a Bundle in ASCAP Bills


gawker.com

Fresh off a court victory against Google's YouTube, ASCAP tells us it is setting its sights on users of the video-sharing site. Welcome to the exciting world of copyright licensing, blogger; you may already owe gobs of money!

ASCAP licenses the performance rights for music, collecting royalties for its songwriter members when their songs are played in certain contexts.
(visit the link for the full news article)



I need to sign up for ASCAP.......Yea they are legit about everything and track everything....I'm surprised they haven't already been doing this....


Some things I would be pissed about as an artist. But for 80% of Music artists, this is how they get their exposure.....

There is good and bad to everything .....ASCAP and viewers/users need to realize this......



I make music and sometime in the future am going to release it.......

I understand after having gone to school to learn all this, that it is in my best interest to not charge or make any money off of some of my material...

If I charge for everything, sometime people don't want to pay..

If it is free, I may get another 100 people who, were not going to pay for my music in the first place or even listen to it, be able to listen to my songs now and I've gained more by doing less....


In the long run it is about making a living doing what you love and to be fair there must be organizations like ASCAP doing this to make sure everybody gets their fair share...


Most artists also need to realize the importance of the value of a dollar...

If I can get 3 good tracks from somebody and 10 fillers for 17.99 $ or I can buy some underground artists Whole 20 song cd for 5$ and it has 10 good songs, then what is the better deal?

Sorry for clam rant......( even possible ? haha )...

Anyways Yea if an artist does not want their video watched then that is their right....

i would say majority will "leak" their own stuff to get around this if need be...




posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I agree with this actually.

You should not be allowed to upload the work of other people which was created to make a profit and you turn around and make it available for free.

How would the creators of stuff like it if I gave away the source code for all software/ gave away every family secret recipe to anyone who asked/gave away the recipe to say KFC chicken outside of KFC.


I think people should be allowed to upload works that they own.

How is youtube, any-site or place different you are using someone else work you should compensate them some how. Have it be through you removing your copy of their work or allowing them to place a gaint ad or banner in front of it so be it.

I think that their should be a something where you get a lience to use a song or clip like the harry fox agency and you make pay about 14 dollars for it. You could either do that, go to the publisher and writers or make your own music.

There is no reason why people who don't own what there uploading should not be held accountable period.




I have worked at a major and a independent label before and most artist don't have a clue what there doing I have seen artist just sign stuff for no reason other than being asked to with out question to what it is.

You should not blame the label for doing whatever they do people (the artist) let them get away with it (not reading what they sign and agreeing to bs terms)

If you sign a contract that is as thick as a magazine and do not read that you have no control over so and so that's your own damn fault for being a greedy idiot and not thinking of the future.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by jatsc]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
 


That's one option, but it may only be a temporary one. The RIAA/MPAA would eventually get to the new host sites, one way or another. Thanks for the replies, everyone.


TA




But sites will go up faster than you know what if people find out Youtube is not longer the Hot Sh*t for watching videos.....



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


I side with the Music Industry on this one. An artist should get paid when his work is reproduced. It is no diferent than playing it on the radio or in a bar or whatever.



Yea you are still hearing the Audio, but you get the visual free...

still must pay for the audio...

The only way around that is to have an artists music video with no Music attached .....lol how dumb would that be....



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Artists get royalties as well if they wrote the song. It is not just producers and media execs.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


It isn't just producers/executives who earn their money from the sell of recordings. There's a lot that goes into the making of a professional recording. The people who work to record, mix and master the music deserve to get payed for their work as much as anyone else, and stealing music is stealing from them as well as everyone else involved in the process.


TA



All of those people typically get paid the same regardless of how much $ a particular record makes. Thats what the producer does, he produces, then reaps the rewards.

Its the producers executives and stockholders that get the profits.

Why do you think artists have to tour to make $?

Also what happened to free advertising? lol

Their greed has caused me to swear off all big label music completely, and I listen to stuff thats free like Del the Funky Homosapien, and support him directly without going through a record label.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Youtubers will just have to switch to music that is in the public domain, create their own music or leave music off. Most times I turn the music off when I watch UFO vids its distracting

Seems a simple solution

I think its the music videos they are going after mainly, And doesn't youtube have a shared file system of music that is ok to use?


[edit on 8-7-2009 by zorgon]



This also does not apply do Music artists who are not signed with ASCAP ........There are others like ASCAP but they are the most famous and used I believe....


This only effects big name artists really and they already have " enough" money ......

The underground artist trying to make it still wants that extra exposure and are the people most likely to come up with new and creative ways of getting their product out there...



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Maybe they could create a license you could buy and then once you paid your yearly or monthly fee you could do whatever you wanted as long as you put your id somewhere in the video you posted or something to that affect. Then it is win win for everyone.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Actually, I agree with you, but there's got to be a better way to make sure the artists are justly compensated. For instance, running short ads in the video clips and paying the artists with the profit.


TA




Great idea actually....seems like a win win.......



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


So am I, but this is not about the artist getting paid this is about the Music Labels getting paid.

Most independent artist could care less if their music is being downloaded or embedded on peoples sites, because that is promotion for them.

This is all about the big four music labels fattening their pockets not the artist.


Yes there are other successfull money making models out there that are in use but the big 4 do not want to adapt as that makes then vulnerable to possible not having as much control and it might be harder for them to regain it.....

They don't want to lose the easy money they have been making so they keep fighting until they can't anymore......



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jatsc
 


I agree with you fully. But where is the personal responsibility of the label. There is a feature on youtube that will forbid people from embedding videos on their sites. Youtube should take down the unauthorized uploads, but it should also be the responsibility of the label to make sure nobody can embed the video into their site.

When Youtube removes the unauthorized video then where ever it is embedded it goes away. If the RIAA wants to do this they should have to set up their own site to where you have to pay a fee to embed said video.

And I also agree with the stupid artist too. They sign their souls away to go tour around the country hoping to make it and in reality the labels are just putting them on the self never to be heard from again, or pull them out and promote them if they kissed the right butt.

It's a dirty industry, and it's also a huge double standard. It's no secret that top name producers steal other peoples music put their names on it and the originator of the music doesn't have the money to get proper credit.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


I side with the Music Industry on this one. An artist should get paid when his work is reproduced. It is no diferent than playing it on the radio or in a bar or whatever.


But the artists aren't getting paid. Its the producers.

So WTF????

You support executives stealing artists music, and then selling it as if it were their own ???

Wow you must hate artists?



Most producers get paid a lot of the time half up front and half on the back end......

They make money before these songs are ever even on video........for the most part that is......there are always exceptions..



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LucidDreamer85
 




They don't want to lose the easy money they have been making so they keep fighting until they can't anymore......


True. They're going to keep trying to do things the old way until there's no option but to adapt.

I don't even like MP3's personally, they don't sound 'right' to me. But It looks like I'll have to settle for them at some point in the near future. Hopefully there will still be a market for CD's and vinyl, but it's not looking good.


TA



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
If imbedding a Youtube video is illegal, Youtube should not be supplying the imbed code.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


I agree but there is also the fact that not everything on youtube is uploaded by the label or content owner.

Many videos from Sony & UMG can not be embedded but that does not stop the thousands of others from putting another copy of the music or video up.


I can go on there right now and type in a current music video title and the labels page will pop up as well as 100 others who have no permission to have uploaded it.


I have even seen videos on youtube that friends have made as jokes
posted many times on the pages of other people whom none of us know and never gave permission too.

Only the owners and or creators of such videos should be able to upload anything.

I agree that things could be more open but not claiming that you own something when you do not.


They are many sites on the internet that specialize in taking stuff off of youtube for others to see.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by jatsc]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Artists get royalties as well if they wrote the song. It is not just producers and media execs.


So Elvis, Jim Morrison, Jimi, MJ, etc are getting royalties?

I am confused I thought they were dead.

Do they just Western Union that to Heaven/Hell or what? How does that work out?



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by jatsc
 


I agree with you fully. But where is the personal responsibility of the label. There is a feature on youtube that will forbid people from embedding videos on their sites. Youtube should take down the unauthorized uploads, but it should also be the responsibility of the label to make sure nobody can embed the video into their site.

When Youtube removes the unauthorized video then where ever it is embedded it goes away. If the RIAA wants to do this they should have to set up their own site to where you have to pay a fee to embed said video.

And I also agree with the stupid artist too. They sign their souls away to go tour around the country hoping to make it and in reality the labels are just putting them on the self never to be heard from again, or pull them out and promote them if they kissed the right butt.

It's a dirty industry, and it's also a huge double standard. It's no secret that top name producers steal other peoples music put their names on it and the originator of the music doesn't have the money to get proper credit.



That is why if you value your product you must take every precaution possible to protect what is yours....

You can't win em all, but if your are careless it is almost your own fault...

Copyright everything.....Don't sign anything until you have somebody who knows what it is all about reads and re-reads it over.......

If a big name artist does steal your music then there are ways to prove it is yours...

I guess they say possession is 9/10ths the law or something...


You could always do the mail your songs to yourself trick as a physical form of proof that " at this date and time i owned this song and mailed it to myself to link it to a date to prove it is mine"....

That and always back up your songs onto at least 2 hard drives , and at least 1 cd.....

If you have all that , you have a strong case and that producer is going to look very very very foolish at the end of the day...

If word gets out that they steal music, they might get less offers to produce because the artists working with them don't want to be dragged into other lawsuits .....


Some do get away with it but just do what you can..



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   
O BTW before I forget....

Is there are section on ATS for people who make their own music, to post it or possibly talk collabs or anything like that?

I understand this site is not for that, but I supposed there are a decent amount of people on here who create and I would love to listen and possibly ( once i have copywritten it.....post some of my own )

[edit on 8-7-2009 by LucidDreamer85]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Youtubers will just have to switch to music that is in the public domain, create their own music


I can imagine the next "Micheal Jackson" being discovered from creating his own Youboob video music when he needed non copyrighted music in his "Anti-Fish" Video.

Now that would be funny.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate
reply to post by LucidDreamer85
 




They don't want to lose the easy money they have been making so they keep fighting until they can't anymore......


True. They're going to keep trying to do things the old way until there's no option but to adapt.

I don't even like MP3's personally, they don't sound 'right' to me. But It looks like I'll have to settle for them at some point in the near future. Hopefully there will still be a market for CD's and vinyl, but it's not looking good.


TA




Yes there is something about owning a really good cd and having the actual physical copy that is special and nostalgic for me at least...

I'm 24 so I grew up with tapes moving into the CD phase my whole life and would have for it all to turn into the transfering of electronic media..

Yes mp3's if you compare and contrast vs a higher quality version ( at least 192 ) then you can tell, but a lot of the times if it is mixed well and is a certain genre it still sounds almost identical.....


Vinyl will never die............Just like the mullet......I see them every now and then..lol



new topics




 
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join