Save energy. Save money. THD
June 14, 2006 3:17 PM PDT
EMI courts YouTube to help fight pirates
- Related Stories
-
Service lets people rip videos from YouTube, other sites
June 14, 2006 -
New group to standardize digital music data
May 4, 2006 -
Is the Web the new Hollywood?
May 3, 2006 -
Movie blackout for P2P networks?
February 10, 2005
"We're actively trying to strike relationships (with user-generated video sites) for the showing of our music videos," Thomas Ryan, EMI Music's senior vice president of digital and mobile strategy, said Wednesday here at the Piper Jaffray Global Internet Summit, a three-day confab of investors and Internet executives.
"It's our hope that those commercial relationships will help us remove infringing material that someone uploaded and we're not being compensated for," Ryan said during a panel discussion about online entertainment.
Ryan said EMI is interested in protecting video produced by the label, or video produced by someone else but which infringes on its intellectual property--for example, someone lip-syncing a protected song or who has remixed a music video clip. One solution to the problem is digital tracking technology.
Reminiscent of the early days of Napster, record labels and music studios face new piracy challenges as video consumption explodes on the Internet and through digital devices such as Apple Computer's iPod. Many companies like EMI are trying to promote download sales of music videos, subscriptions and advertising-supported streaming of trailers, music videos and other promotional material.
But those goals can be diametrically opposed to emerging trends within sites like YouTube and Revver--which have thousands of young people uploading their own versions of videos for distribution, or are redistributing copies of their favorite music video without the permission of rights holders.
As part of its policy, YouTube prohibits anyone except legitimate rights holders, such as EMI, from uploading copyright content to its site. Despite that, such content does get posted illegally. As a result, Ryan said, a fingerprinting technology could be used to automate the process for detecting illegally uploaded material. Such marking technology has long been used to track illegally distributed MP3s in peer-to-peer networks.
Ryan pointed to fingerprinting technologies, designed to automatically identify and block transmission of digital-video files, such as those from Audible Magic or Snocap as possibilities.
However, there is a line between what could and could not be seen as infringement, according to Ryan. For example, a user-generated video of a fan lip-syncing a popular song may be viewed as harmless, or even helpful for promoting the band, among rights holders. But depending on the band, song and the nature of the video (if say, it contains racy material), the uploaded video might be taken down if the record label has its way.
Still, EMI is trying to take a progressive approach when it comes to video online, and not necessarily trying to stop the organic promotion of artists like Coldplay on sites and personal pages around the Web. Rather, the label is just concerned with protecting its own revenue stream, Ryan said.
To this end, EMI has struck deals with companies like Rhythm Media to stream music videos to mobile phones, with advertisements that appear before the video. It shares revenue on the ads, and Ryan said those test runs have been successful with viewers.
In recent weeks, it also teamed with a new service called Qtrax, an advertising-supported peer-to-peer network, which is slated to launch later this year. EMI will make its music catalog available on the peer-to-peer service in a bold move to embrace technology it once sought to disable for piracy.
With all such services, "our goal is to up-sell them," Ryan said. "This is a learning experience for us."
YouTube representatives were not immediately available for comment.
See more CNET content tagged:
EMI Group Plc.,
YouTube,
P2P,
piracy,
song
I can understand their grief with people sharing their mp3 songs. But, if people want to create their own video versions of a particular song, then let them. Why not??? It's free advertisement/promotion.
Blocking people from posting the original music video is ok with me. But, allow people the joy to play around and express themselves.
The labels did the same with MIDI hosting companies. Now, one can't find MIDI versions of any songs. They've tried the same with guitar tablatures. They're trying hard to control and stop websites from hosting guitar/bass/drums tabs created by fans of the artists.
If they want to go the right and fair way about it, is to ask these hosting companies to share their advertisement profits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tPsK-m16xI&search=sexy%20video%20music%20kezia%20pop%20london
I guarantee I will buy her album when it is released if it's not a Sony album. And that's just one example.
"We have to protect our revenue streams, and we've found that fans are the number one source of content piracy." stated executives from major audio and video content producers.
Requests for permission to view/listen to content are expected to cost $.99 each.
"These pirate cyber-punks need to understand that it is our content, and if they don't want to play our way, we will take our ball and go home," stated another executive when asked if this was a wise move by the industry. This reporter for one will truly miss the talents of Brittany Spears and the like.
FM radio comes along, music industry hates it. Claims all that listen are "pirates". MTV comes along, again, music industry wants it shutdown, claims people are freeloading, getting music without paying. All the while, both mediums help them to rake in the cash, while they persecute and denounce their fans and customerbase.
Online takes shape, people download songs illegally (which I am not defending) but numerous studies show that illegal downloaders are actually more likely to purchase other/the same song LEGALLY after downloading. Digital music sales take off and their sales and cash-hoaring increases (still while persecuting their fans to this day).
Flash forward to present day - YouTube, Google Video, etc. is rampant with user generated videos, mixes, and original music videos. They labels (EMI thus far) are unsurprisingly irate (Collective gasp....)
So let's get this right; Fans are supporting the bands and artists they like by creating their own video/audio tributes or their own mixes. In turn, that spurs more sales for legal music downloads (and possibly even video downloads ala iTunes) and they are still pissed off? Someone PLEASE explain that to me?
If the heads of EMI are expecting music sales and income to return to the hayday that it once was, they are sorely mistaken. You simply cannot expect to make more money by alienating your customers, sueing them to oblivion, and by having a preconcieved notion that they are ALL thieves out to steal your content. They should be happy people are even taking their content to the next level.
As a side note, I downloaded a video from YouTube from Bruce Springstien, and, low and behold- I went and bought the album from iTunes! No promotional fees on the labels part, "free" sale of an entire ablum and they still pi$$ and moan. What the heckily-deckily is wrong with these people? Enough is enough!
RIAA sues Youtube users
Thursday June 15th 2006, 2:45 pm
Filed under: News
By: Jayesh Mansukhani
"It seems our friends over at the RIAA just cannot get enough. The latest BS to emerge from there are cease-and-desist letters to Youtube users who have dared to put up videos of things such as themselves dancing to music they haven?t licensed.
Clearly an insanity plea no longer covers the RIAA?s stupidity. From trying to orchestrate illegal takedowns in other countries a la The Pirate Bay to sending cease-and-desist letters to some poor user who has just recorded himself doing silly things to a song no one will even remember a week later. Youtube is all about expressing yourself in your own little corner on the net. Guess with Big Brother watching, soon even putting out harmless videos will become illegal."
Dave
http://tech.moneycontrol.com/news/riaa-sues-youtube-users/1526/india/
RIAA sues Youtube users
Thursday June 15th 2006, 2:45 pm
Filed under: News
By: Jayesh Mansukhani
"It seems our friends over at the RIAA just cannot get enough. The latest BS to emerge from there are cease-and-desist letters to Youtube users who have dared to put up videos of things such as themselves dancing to music they haven?t licensed."
"Clearly an insanity plea no longer covers the RIAA?s stupidity. From trying to orchestrate illegal takedowns in other countries a la The Pirate Bay to sending cease-and-desist letters to some poor user who has just recorded himself doing silly things to a song no one will even remember a week later. Youtube is all about expressing yourself in your own little corner on the net. Guess with Big Brother watching, soon even putting out harmless videos will become illegal."
Dave
Sadly , most of the new music , that which is supplied from the big 4, is either second and third rate rubbish and useless padding or badly cloned older styled formula rubbish, and offers little but expensive entertainment value! The small independent labels seem to be supplying all the new ideas, concepts and inspirations!
Here is to the freedom of independent choices, that internet can offer, to all the users' at this point in time!