You are here

Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Advice on everything from getting your music heard to setting up a label and royalties.

Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:46 pm

Ref (among others) the YouTube thread, check out

http://makeinternetfair.eu/

there's an ongoing petition to sign.
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby blinddrew » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:10 pm

It won't surprise you that I don't agree with most of that and won't be signing :)
The question of "what is a fair rate of remuneration" is the first thing that would need to be settled, and since we don't know if youtube is profitable we can't actually answer that question.
Removal of safe-harbours would be a terrible thing for the web as we know it. The correct attribution of liability is what allows any site to host user generated content. Without that we would not have the tools we have now, from youtube to this forum.
I reckon ;)
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5305
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby BigRedX » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:36 pm

As far as I can tell, from the information that is available, YouTube on its own makes a loss and only survives because it is propped up by Google's profitable services.
User avatar
BigRedX
Frequent Poster
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:00 am
RockinRollin' VampireMan

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby blinddrew » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:49 pm

That's what I've heard, and certainly was what was being reported prior to everything coming under the Alphabet umbrella a couple of years ago. Whether that's still the case I'm not sure.
Interestingly, new laws being proposed by the UK, the US and the EU are going to massively push up the operating costs for the big content companies as they have to increase their moderation teams (and their liability insurance). Facebook, for example, is hiring an additional 20,000 content moderators - which is pretty staggering when you think about it.
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5305
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby Forum Admin » Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:25 pm

blinddrew wrote:Facebook, for example, is hiring an additional 20,000 content moderators - which is pretty staggering when you think about it.

YouTube could just employ a kennel's worth of dogs to view the upload screens, and they'd bark every time they saw one of those crap Cat vids. :D
User avatar
Forum Admin
Moderator
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 11:00 pm
Location: A studio deep in the fenlands of Cambridgeshire, UK
SEARCH 10,310 top articles: www.soundonsound.com/search
*NEW* SOS Tutorials: www.soundonsound.com/tutorials

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby blinddrew » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:23 pm

That could work :)
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5305
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:08 pm

The petition is supported by the various PRO - I received the link from mine - which are the same organizations wihch make live gigging a viable option cor making a living with music. I suppose playing music live would be fair use as well on YoutTube standards, after all, the punters are happy and the club owners only make a little money.. ;-) The only difference is that, unlike the Internet, live music playing was already regulated before they came out.

That YouTube is nice for people who don’t try to live on the content they create, I fully appreciate. But that it constitute a safe harbor when there is, clealry, a profitability intent (if not the actual realizatiom) is beyond me. A library is a safe harbor because nobody trie to make a profit out of it. Wikipedia and creative commons are. The very fact that YouTube pays something to cretors who acutely claim ownerships is a recognition that it is not.
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby blinddrew » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:22 pm

This is where it gets messy. Safe harbours have nothing to do with making money, profit or otherwise. Safe harbours are just about correct attribution of liability, i.e. ensuring that those have committed a crime are the ones who are punished. It is the safe harbours that allow companies to open their content hosting to third parties safe that they will not be held accountable for the illegal actions of their users. It is about making sure that the car maker is not responsible for the speeding driver, even if they make a car that is capable of speeding.
Fair use is something completely different and covers a number of factors that allow for all manner of non-infringing use of copyrighted content, from incidentally captured background music through to journalism, from parody to transformative works.
There are plenty of people making a living using youtube as part of their business model, from the tiny to the huge. The idea that these platforms are freeriders (to use the term from the petition) is unfounded; they are providing a valuable service to their users. If it was such a simple thing that added no value to the chain then it would be easy to set up a competing service. In fact, plenty already exist, but they too add value to their users.

Personally speaking, youtube has done more for me than copyright or any PRO has done, even when i was euphamistically a 'signed' act. Your experience may be different.

I am genuinely curious as to what you would like the outcome of the petition to be?
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5305
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby blinddrew » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:36 pm

Actually, ignore that last question. I've had these discussions before and they never bear any fruit. I'd rather keep coming to this site to talk music not business. :)
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5305
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:14 am

I take you,re talking about DCMA safe harbour, right? The issue at hand for YouTube, to me, is the «direct financial benefit». I think it can be reasonably argued that a regular ISP, for example, does not receives direct financial benefit from, say, film or music uploaders - because it demonstrably provides a whole lot of other services which have nothing to do with content. For YT the situation is different: any (advertising) revenue that it receives is directly connected to content sharing. Copyrighted content is a large part of the content that is shared - without that, ad revenues would tank. YT complies withe the DCMA takedown regulations, but the trick is that it may take years for an owner to detect the violation and raise the claim, and for all that time YT gains direct financial benefits from the stolen material. For years.

For example a few years ago I noticed that one of my fave UK series, space 1999 was available in its entirety on YT. Of course it was a great service to me. I have no other easy way to watch it and I was superhappy to be able to show it to my son (who predictably reacted with a wtf is that dad? He liked the Eagles tough :-D). A few months ago it disappeared, obviously due to a takedown notice. But for at least 5+ years YT owners have profited on the ad revenues generated by complex content which they did not own, without sharing any with the original creators. And even when it does, the creator’s cut is ridicolous. It’s like someone coming to your house, taking something, giving you 1cent for it and telling you ‘look, you should be happy!’. Sure, YT redistributes much money, but that’s because a small percentage of a very latge cake sounds still pretty big, if you dont know the whole cake.

To be clear, YT is great for me: I loved watching my Space 1999 free and whenever I wanted. But to me it’s also simply a matter og principle: am I ok, or am I not ok that someone makes a profit on stolen mterial, and not accidentally, but by desiign in their business model? I find I am not, for the same reason for which I’m not ok with tax evasion or buying stolen Startocasters.

YT in the current form will go down, there’s no doubt about that. Things are catching up . That doesn’t mean that the services we enjoy will disappear, only that it will require some sort of subscription or small individual fee to generate enough cash to pay for the stuff they use to make money. If anything, the experience has provn there is an enormous market.

Look at Netflix: creators are acknowledged and paid, everyone gets their content and the whole dynamic creates enough market so that prices stay low. And one of the side results is that NF is now triggered an gigantic wave of amazing content, giving filmmakers, actors and all the people working in the industry incredible opportunities which they would have otherwise (unknonw directors, screenwriters, actors etc).. ushering a true golden age of television productions. All of which legally and over board.

They and the content creators just did not assume their products had zero value, and acted accordingly, and everyone’s happy.
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby ken long » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:15 am

blinddrew wrote:It won't surprise you that I don't agree with most of that and won't be signing :)
The question of "what is a fair rate of remuneration" is the first thing that would need to be settled, and since we don't know if youtube is profitable we can't actually answer that question.
Removal of safe-harbours would be a terrible thing for the web as we know it. The correct attribution of liability is what allows any site to host user generated content. Without that we would not have the tools we have now, from youtube to this forum.
I reckon ;)


Well said!
User avatar
ken long
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:00 am
Location: Somers Town
I'm All Ears.

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:22 am

This forum would not exist if people weren’t willing to pay SOS magazines and subscriptions. SOS uses parts of the proceedings to pay for it. SOS chooses to share their content freely after 3 months and they have undoubtedly made a calculation that it’s in their interest, and we’re lucky that such interest is aligned with us readers.

Similarly other successful forum uses advertising because there’s enough movement there to make it valuable to pay to advertise there.

It’s a world apart from YT. If I uploaded the entre magazine someplace and people went in droves to read it there for free, very quikly there would be no magazine, and no forum.
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:24 am

blinddrew wrote:Actually, ignore that last question. I've had these discussions before and they never bear any fruit. I'd rather keep coming to this site to talk music not business. :)

Ahah but it doesn’t need the be nasty or acrimonious. It’s no different than gently suggest that putting a compressor on every track isn’t gonna work, and why.. :)
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby Hugh Robjohns » Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:40 pm

CS70 wrote:I noticed that one of my fave UK series, space 1999 was available in its entirety on YT. Of course it was a great service to me. I have no other easy way to watch it ... I loved watching my Space 1999 free and whenever I wanted. But to me it’s also simply a matter of principle: am I ok, or am I not ok that someone makes a profit on stolen material, and not accidentally, but by design in their business model? I find I am not...

I find I'm struggling a bit with your ethics here. Space 1999 is easily and legally available on DVD... yet you chose to watch it on YT under the presumption that it was being hosted illegally, and then complain that it was being hosted illegally... Hmmm... :smirk:

H
User avatar
Hugh Robjohns
Moderator
Posts: 21918
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:55 pm

Hugh Robjohns wrote:
CS70 wrote:I noticed that one of my fave UK series, space 1999 was available in its entirety on YT. Of course it was a great service to me. I have no other easy way to watch it ... I loved watching my Space 1999 free and whenever I wanted. But to me it’s also simply a matter of principle: am I ok, or am I not ok that someone makes a profit on stolen material, and not accidentally, but by design in their business model? I find I am not...

I find I'm struggling a bit with your ethics here. Space 1999 is easily and legally available on DVD... yet you chose to watch it on YT under the presumption that it was being hosted illegally, and then complain that it was being hosted illegally... Hmmm... :smirk:

H

Good then that my ethics aren’t what we talk about. :) Say I kill someone, would it make a statement about the fact that killing is wrong, untrue?

For what’s worth, I found out afterwards and purchased the dvd box and ripped it off to a drive as I don’t normally have a dvd player available. Back then I had no idea such box existed. But no matter,, I have no problem agreeing that it wasn’t right (back 5 years ago I had no idea it was available anywhere, and having not watched it since I was 8 I was a trifle excited).

But as I say, it’s beyond the point - which is YT business behavior, not mine. There are three behaviors here, the uploader, the corporate whose business model is based on uploads and the viewer. I think the 1999 uploader was a passionate fan; I know I was, and back then I hadn’t at all the implications clear - as much as some seem still no to do. Now, which of the three entities is in the position to know best? How much more unethical is that when is actually done by a huge corporation, whose business model is based on content sharing, but avows any responsibility about the content they share?
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby ManFromGlass » Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:14 pm

Sorry CS70 but I have heard that Netflix is not the shining example you suggest, particularly if you are a composer who thinks they are worthy of a decent fee and retaining of the your copyright.
User avatar
ManFromGlass
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1516
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 12:00 am
Location: In the woods in Canada
 

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:30 pm

ManFromGlass wrote:Sorry CS70 but I have heard that Netflix is not the shining example you suggest, particularly if you are a composer who thinks they are worthy of a decent fee and retaining of the your copyright.

The example was about deciding yourself, as a creator, if you agree or not to the amount before it’s used. It’s a competitive market and there’s no gods right to be a creator.

That said, nobody will ever pay anyone more than the minimum they can, to get the quality they want?
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby Hugh Robjohns » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:00 pm

CS70 wrote: ...having not watched it since I was 8 I was a trifle excited.

Not that keen on Space 1999 -- although the Eagle transporters are pretty cool. Now UFO was something really special... :-D

H
User avatar
Hugh Robjohns
Moderator
Posts: 21918
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby BikerDude » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:37 pm

Doesn't the change that got made a few months ago affect this?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/streaming- ... ublishers/
BikerDude
Poster
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:44 pm

Re: Apropos YouTube... petition for fairer transfer of value

Postby CS70 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:40 pm

Hugh Robjohns wrote:
CS70 wrote: ...having not watched it since I was 8 I was a trifle excited.

Not that keen on Space 1999 -- although the Eagle transporters are pretty cool. Now UFO was something really special... :-D

H

Haha the opposite here, but probably because UFO as not sent regularly on the Italian tv, as opposite to 1999.. and just timing: I was young, impressionable and the Eagles where the coolest thing I’d ever seen!
User avatar
CS70
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2930
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:00 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Silver Spoon - Check out our latest video  and the FB page

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users