|
09 Mar 09 - 06:16 PM (#2585081) Subject: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: VirginiaTam Google and PRS in deadlock as music videos pulled from YouTube Guardian article While I am in support of the Performing Rights Society making certain artists get renumeration for their work, I wonder if this is really a good idea. I will miss not being able to access songs I want to learn, because in searching and accidentally discovering new artists, I am more likely to be prompted to buy their CDs. |
|
09 Mar 09 - 06:25 PM (#2585086) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: nutty Here's a link to a BBC article on events CLICK |
|
09 Mar 09 - 07:48 PM (#2585174) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Richard Bridge Still up there, it seems |
|
10 Mar 09 - 04:46 AM (#2585354) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Newport Boy Both parties interviewed on Radio 4 this morning, making very friendly noises. They're meeting again this afternoon. Looks like this is just a negotiating tactic - I think it will be sorted fairly soon. Phil |
|
10 Mar 09 - 05:42 AM (#2585381) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Will Fly Personally, I couldn't care less about "premium music videos". I treasure YouTube for clips of old bluesmen, music hall artistes and other off-the-wall stuff. I'm also happy to pay for that where I can. |
|
10 Mar 09 - 06:10 AM (#2585394) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: GUEST,Hootenanny To me "Premium music videos" equals Pop Pap which is readily available elsewhere and force fed to people who mostly just want audio wallpaper in their everyday life and not much more. I wouldn't find that a loss personally. The real value of you tube for me is the availability of so much from the past of the sort of material referred to by Will Fly, material that rarely if ever shows up on television or elsewhere. Music and entertainment that lives on because it has something to offer in itself and doesn't need a high powered expensive film to make you think that the music in itself is worth listening to. Hoot |
|
10 Mar 09 - 10:23 AM (#2585590) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: VirginiaTam I wouldn't pay for a music video, but I will go out and buy CD after happening on music I like on youtube. I think I heard someone on news say the same. I would like to know who exactly in the PRS was demanding more money from Google? Is it artists themselves? Or is it only a few big named artists? Would be horrible if lesser known artists lose out on exposure, sales of CDs, and gigs because a few celebs want to protect their property. Hope it is sorted amicably and soon. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 05:40 AM (#2586220) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Newport Boy Reading between the lines of the discussion on Radio 4, I think the scenario is something like: Google have paid a sum per year based on figures from a year or so back. The number of videos has grown exponentially since then. The PRS wants to up the licence fee to recognise the new numbers, but this will be less per song than it was when the existing fee was agreed. This enables Google to claim a massive increase, and PRS to claim a reduction. They're both right. That's my interpretation - no figures were quoted, so I may be miles wide of the mark. Phil |
|
11 Mar 09 - 05:46 AM (#2586227) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Arnie I read recently that the new chief exec of PRS is on a six-figure salary and his board are also high-earners. In order to sustain these salaries, the PRS has started pursuing everyone they can bully into buying one of their licences. They even threatened a self-employed chap who worked from home, on the grounds that if his wife entered his home-office with a cup of coffee she would hear his radio thus making this a public performance! Needless to say the PRS backed down when he offered to see them in court. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:00 AM (#2586236) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Leadfingers P R S do themselves NO favours with their attitude . A lot of people I know DO get a small slice of the pie , but they all know that the big players get most of the money that PRS collects . Should Folk Artists be subsidising Paul McCartney and Michael Jackson ? |
|
11 Mar 09 - 06:14 AM (#2586242) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: Liz the Squeak Delicate path to tread here. Whilst I'm in favour of performers getting their due rewards and royalties, and indeed, my employers encourage compliance in this, I'm also a member of a choir that simply cannot afford to perform contemporary music because it's all too expensive to buy, hire, get permissions for and pay the PRS. I agree that YouBoob has played its part in bringing types of music to people who might not otherwise have heard it, but I also agree that it should not be to the detriment of the income of those who perform it. It's one more sign of the times that we all want something for nothing, but there is no such thing as a free lunch. LTS |
|
11 Mar 09 - 03:15 PM (#2586561) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: VirginiaTam Should Folk Artists be subsidising Paul McCartney and Michael Jackson See that is exactly what I worry about. The greed of the powerful grinding out the opportunities of unknown talent. I recently followed a thread about artists ridiculous demands on performance contracts. Paul McCartney (a child of the Midlands) refused to permit union members to work his gigs? What the f**k was that about? The same shit goes on in the publishing industry. The big book stores pressure publishers to only publish certain names and titles they think will sell, making it more and more difficult for new high quality writers to get published. This is why we see so many vapid crap biogs of flash in the pan TV, radio, sport and page 3 celebs all over the shelves. God yes I need another Big Brother cookery book. That's 3 Christmas prezzies sorted. I THINK NOT! There needs to be a hew and cry against these celebs and their money grubbing corporations by the consumer. Letters of complaint to be sent to individuals, corporations, and media. Sigh. My soapbox just broke. |
|
11 Mar 09 - 04:15 PM (#2586605) Subject: RE: Music Videos pulled from YouTube From: The Barden of England The thing that really bothers me is that a venue may have to pay the PRS money for me to play and sing my own songs i.e. the ones that I have written both the words and music for when I'm performing in public. I believe that this situation is a possibility. Is this so? John Barden |