Political Crossfire Forums

[FCTE]

The recording industry is at it again this time going after YouTube and Myspace for copyright infringement. Claiming that users who upload music videos, whole or partial, have cost them tens of millions of dollars. They have not announced what their plans are only that they are going to take action. They also took a puck shot at MTV claiming that MTV built it's empire off of "their" music.

I think the recording industry needs to realize that the industry has changed and they need to change or die off.


Quote: Youtube & Myspace pissess off the record companies
Posted by leflaw on September 14, 2006 at 11:20 PM

NEW YORK -- Universal Music Group, the world's biggest record company, is stepping up pressure against popular websites YouTube and MySpace, accusing them of infringing the copyrights of its artists' music videos.

Universal chief executive Doug Morris described video site YouTube and News Corp.'s social-networking site MySpace as "copyright infringers" during a Merrill Lynch investors' conference speech Tuesday that was closed to the press.

"The poster child for (user-generated media) sites are MySpace and YouTube," said Morris, according to a transcript obtained by Reuters. "We believe these new businesses are copyright infringers and owe us tens of millions of dollars."

He added, "How we deal with these companies will be revealed shortly."

"His remarks strongly suggested the company was planning to take legal action in the near-term to either prevent the illegal use of their content on these websites or to ensure the company is compensated for the use of its content," Jessica Reif Cohen, analyst at Merrill Lynch, wrote in a note Wednesday.

"This could be the first salvo from a content player against business models based on user-generated content, much of which relies on copyrighted material."

Universal, owned by French media group Vivendi, has been in negotiations with both YouTube and MySpace to offer its artists' music legally for a fee.

A spokeswoman for YouTube, a 2-year-old startup company that already boasts more than 100 million viewings of short videos uploaded by users, said, "It is our policy not to comment on our business negotiations."

MySpace declined to comment.

The runaway success of the free-to-view online video sites has raised the question of whether rights holders such as record companies and movie companies should be compensated, even if the clips are uploaded by users.

To date, YouTube has said it will take down any copyright-protected material illegally posted on the site once it has been alerted by the rights holder.

In February, YouTube was ordered by lawyers for General Electric-owned television network NBC to remove illegally posted clips of some of its television shows, though in June the companies agreed to feature some of NBC's shows legally on the site.

Last month, YouTube told Reuters that it is in discussions with record companies to offer its users the ability to watch virtually every music video ever made, but had yet to settle on a business model to allow viewers to see the videos for free.

YouTube also announced later that month it would be testing a new advertising model with Warner Music Group featuring celebrity hotel heiress Paris Hilton.

Record companies are keen to avoid repeating the mistake they believe they made when Viacom's MTV was set up 25 years ago -- allowing their artists' music to be aired for free.

Morris in his remarks to investors Tuesday said MTV "built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music) ... for virtually nothing. We learned a hard lesson."

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/20705

[Pebble]

This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."

[FCTE]

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."

The artists are slaves to their contracts unfortunately. Many of them would probably care less about free distribution of their music if the record companies weren't sucking away a large portion of the profits.

[Wolverine]

Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

[Quicksurf]

Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:

[The Comrade]

i hope they start suing twelve year old girls again.



record companies are the epitome of greedy, blood sucking, business men.

[micfranklin]

FCTE wrote: The recording industry is at it again this time going after YouTube and Myspace for copyright infringement. Claiming that users who upload music videos, whole or partial, have cost them tens of millions of dollars. They have not announced what their plans are only that they are going to take action. They also took a puck shot at MTV claiming that MTV built it's empire off of "their" music.

I think the recording industry needs to realize that the industry has changed and they need to change or die off.


Quote: Youtube & Myspace pissess off the record companies
Posted by leflaw on September 14, 2006 at 11:20 PM

NEW YORK -- Universal Music Group, the world's biggest record company, is stepping up pressure against popular websites YouTube and MySpace, accusing them of infringing the copyrights of its artists' music videos.

Universal chief executive Doug Morris described video site YouTube and News Corp.'s social-networking site MySpace as "copyright infringers" during a Merrill Lynch investors' conference speech Tuesday that was closed to the press.

"The poster child for (user-generated media) sites are MySpace and YouTube," said Morris, according to a transcript obtained by Reuters. "We believe these new businesses are copyright infringers and owe us tens of millions of dollars."

He added, "How we deal with these companies will be revealed shortly."

"His remarks strongly suggested the company was planning to take legal action in the near-term to either prevent the illegal use of their content on these websites or to ensure the company is compensated for the use of its content," Jessica Reif Cohen, analyst at Merrill Lynch, wrote in a note Wednesday.

"This could be the first salvo from a content player against business models based on user-generated content, much of which relies on copyrighted material."

Universal, owned by French media group Vivendi, has been in negotiations with both YouTube and MySpace to offer its artists' music legally for a fee.

A spokeswoman for YouTube, a 2-year-old startup company that already boasts more than 100 million viewings of short videos uploaded by users, said, "It is our policy not to comment on our business negotiations."

MySpace declined to comment.

The runaway success of the free-to-view online video sites has raised the question of whether rights holders such as record companies and movie companies should be compensated, even if the clips are uploaded by users.

To date, YouTube has said it will take down any copyright-protected material illegally posted on the site once it has been alerted by the rights holder.

In February, YouTube was ordered by lawyers for General Electric-owned television network NBC to remove illegally posted clips of some of its television shows, though in June the companies agreed to feature some of NBC's shows legally on the site.

Last month, YouTube told Reuters that it is in discussions with record companies to offer its users the ability to watch virtually every music video ever made, but had yet to settle on a business model to allow viewers to see the videos for free.

YouTube also announced later that month it would be testing a new advertising model with Warner Music Group featuring celebrity hotel heiress Paris Hilton.

Record companies are keen to avoid repeating the mistake they believe they made when Viacom's MTV was set up 25 years ago -- allowing their artists' music to be aired for free.

Morris in his remarks to investors Tuesday said MTV "built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music) ... for virtually nothing. We learned a hard lesson."

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/20705

I should've known Myspace would've been the target for a negative backlash sooner or later. And not to be overly critical, but why should MTV care since they don't play any f***ing music videos?

[Protostar]

If the courts were worth anything they would throw this out, as it is foolishness. But we all know the government sides with the corps who have the biggest pockets. :roll: The recording industry is becoming obsolete with the rise of the Internet. They realize this and it terrifies them which is why they are doing everything in their power to slow it down.

[FCTE]

micfranklin wrote: I should've known Myspace would've been the target for a negative backlash sooner or later. And not to be overly critical, but why should MTV care since they don't play any f***ing music videos?

MTV2 and they probably are going to try to claim some kind of retro pay from MTV ever since it's existence.

That would be a court battle I'd paid to see as both the recording industry and MTV have gobs of money.

[Wolverine]

Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

[Revenant]

The Comrade wrote: i hope they start suing twelve year old girls again.



record companies are the epitome of greedy, blood sucking, business men.

Quoted for truth.

[Pebble]

Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

A while back, they brought down powertabs for a while...

There a story here, but im not sure how good it is I only read it.

I believe they also warned UG, but they kindly informed them of Russian law on the matter and told them where to go. :)

[micfranklin]

Wolverine wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

RE-TARD-ED (just wanted to respond to that :-D )

But seriously, recording companies need to get a f***ing grip. I hope this case get thrown out like evening trash, or it'll add on to a long list of worthless cases settled by the courts.

[Quicksurf]

Wolverine wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

John Kerry.

[Pebble]

Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

John Kerry.

How do you say cheap shot. :P

[Quicksurf]

Pebble wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

John Kerry.

How do you say cheap shot. :P

Sometimes I can't resist. Sorry. :-D I figured someone would say GWB sooner or later.

[FCTE]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IdnpXjs1m8

:lol:

[micfranklin]

Stupid recording industries!!!

[Wolverine]

Pebble wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

A while back, they brought down powertabs for a while...

There a story here, but im not sure how good it is I only read it.

I believe they also warned UG, but they kindly informed them of Russian law on the matter and told them where to go. :)
Thats hard to believe. :shock: Where would I be without tabs? :shock:

Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Quicksurf wrote: Wolverine wrote: Its really not surprising, YouTube has a lot of music video's and such.

But. I do use YouTube to decide whether or not I want to buy a particular CD. So in that effect, it does benefit the record companies.

Pebble wrote: This is getting ridiculous. It's almost as bad as when they went after tab sites.

I wonder how many actual artists object to these sorts of service? Note the recording companies, who themselves profit off of other people's work, claiming that "MTV built a multibillion-dollar company on our (music)."
When was this? :shock:

Technically, you aren't allowed to publish "their" music on a website. Even if you credit it to them. :roll:
How do you say retarded?

John Kerry.
:lol:
Very true.

[Gus]

On a similar note, the majority of music tablature sites here in the U.S. are being sued for intellectual property reasons...the only tab sites left are out-of-the-country. Music tablature = transcriptions...e.g. you listen to a song and write out how to play it on a particular instrument.