1. #41
    D minor, the saddest of keys! Wing Commander!!
    Join Date Jul 2011
    Location Wellington NZ
    Posts 831
    Rep Power 469762090

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    In the future, avoid embarassing yourself by not responding to an in-depth article you either didn't bother to read or cannot understand with simplistic propaganda that includes no details by a guy trying to sell advertising by parroting info fed to him by Google.
    Which article is the "simplistic propaganda"? The one by Paul Resnikoff, or Jonathan Taplin?
    I don't see much difference between them in terms of credibility.

    But anyway, onwards. From Taplin's article:
    "Every pirated music video or song posted on YouTube or Facebook robs the creators of income, and YouTube in particular is dominated by unlicensed content. Google’s YouTube has an over 55 percent market share in the streaming audio business and yet provides less than 11 percent of the streaming audio revenues to the content owners and creators."

    He makes four statements.
    The first is arguably true (especially as to just how much income).
    The second is false. The research paper referenced by Resnikoff was quite clear on this point, which is why I suggested you research it earlier. About 98% of Youtube music content views are of authorised material - in most cases, specifically uploaded by the copyright owners themselves.
    The third is likely true, but of debatable relevance.
    The fourth is false. Over half of the revenue is paid to the rights owners. You can argue that it isn't enough, but how could they pay the amounts you have in mind? If they had to pay more in rights than they made from the ads, they'd simply stop accepting music. It's not as if music is even a large part of their business, it apparently accounts for about 12% of total views.

    This pattern shows up throughout the article. Say something true, and use it to add legitimacy to a falsehood. I usually ignore that sort of article, but sometimes the pegging of the bullshit meter gets too insistent to ignore. Hence my initial post.

    In the end, I think Resnikoff sums it up best:
    "Perhaps this debate is really simple: the industry and its artists want more money from YouTube, and YouTube is refusing to pay it. Part of the issue is that all of this is ad-monetized, and there aren’t enough ads running with enough money being generated. Layer in ad blockers and a struggling subscription service, and you can see why YouTube doesn’t want to pay more.

    But is YouTube doing anything illegal? Actually, not really. They just pay like crap while serving the biggest music audience online (and maybe the world). And so far, it doesn’t seem like the music industry has a solution to that problem. Or a way to make YouTube pay them more."

    Put that way, I agree, it sucks to be in the music business (if you're not the RIAA or a large label).
    "We hear what we see." - Doris Day
  2. #42
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 5,361
    Rep Power 536871219

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    The second is false. The research paper referenced by Resnikoff was quite clear on this point, which is why I suggested you research it earlier. About 98% of Youtube music content views are of authorised material - in most cases, specifically uploaded by the copyright owners themselves.
    Sorry, but this is not what the article says.
    It says
    A recent report from music industry research group Midia revealed that just 2% of YouTube’s music video content is unauthorized
    Indeed, "music videos" are mostly uploaded via copyright holders, but music videos are actually a small part of Youtube music content, as you call it.
    There are tons of albums uploaded in their entirety on Youtube. You can easily use Youtube instead of Spotify or Google Play as totally free music player. There are also tons of music used as a background. Sometimes this music is taken down but definitely far from always.
    When in doubt, mumble!

    EVERYTHING SOUNDS LIKE SHIT IF YA LISTEN LONG AND HARD ENOUGH.
  3. #43
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,778
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    Actually it's the young computer programmers who will leave. They can live literally anywhere because of the internet. Nashville is full of dead shopping malls caused by developers tripping over their manhood.
    They CAN live nearly anywhere but the ugly reality is that they DON'T. They tend to flock to the cities that they perceive as "hip" and "fun" and consequently destroy the same qualities they ostensibly came for. They're like locusts. They've destroyed San Francisco to a radius of 50 miles from the city, they're well on the way to killing Austin, and it looks like Nashville is next on the list. The only hope for Nashville is that the music industry is so entrenched there that it's going to be hard to kill and that it's a major tourist magnet specifically for music, but if all the new talent is forced to live a long distance from city center, which is what it looked like was happening when I visited to check out properties, it's certainly going to dilute things.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  4. #44
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Songwriter Gulch
    Posts 10,141
    Rep Power 536871379

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    San Francisco and Austin both have local work for programmers. Nashville has NO local work that pays that kind of money.

    Cheap college towns are the attraction. Take away cheap and then you need local employers. It's a BIG difference the real estate hustlers don't understand!
    Bob's room 615 562-4346
    Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
    Interview
    Artists are the gatekeepers of truth!- Paul Robeson
  5. #45
    Astrological sign is "Feces"! Prefers Epiphone to Gibson
    Join Date Apr 2009
    Location 36-9'56"n/86-47'3"w
    Posts 387
    Rep Power 536871024

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    One thing it's coming down to in Nashville is it has spread out and a car is a handy thing to have. We are moving from Belmont area out to Springfield, which is the fringe of the Nashville metro area but I just started a research project with the Vanderbilt VA that will have me traveling to Murfreesboro VA as well. That's a 1 1/2 hour each way trip from Springfield. It would still be a 45 min trip from Belmont. On the plus side there are musical oasis all around the city so there is probably one near wherever you plop down. The other plus is it is the digital age and you can get a lot done via the internet.
    Rednecks call me a Tree Hugger and Tree Huggers call me a Redneck...I must be doing something right to piss everyone off.
  6. #46
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts 11,627
    Rep Power 536871428

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    Well they managed to save Studio A and Music Row, right?

    I think if it were San Francisco or New York, gentrification might be more likely to have its way.

    In New York, instead of Silicon Valley, it's Wall Street inflating real estate costs. Which is conveniently located near Greenwich Village. Over the years Greenwich Village, where I was born when it was a bad neighborhood, is mostly inhabited by millionaires along with I guess, a few rent-controlled holdouts.

    So the art/ music scene migrated across the river to Williamsburg, which itself then became trendy, then expensive. It's a familiar pattern.
    Man! You have GOT to try a hit of this RANGE SUNSHINE!

    IMTBO = In My Thoroughly Biased Opinion
    CMIIW = Correct Me If I'm Wrong
    Never underestimate the amount of contempt a failed musician has for those of us who are still trying.
    If the party's good enough, you can actually suck to a remarkable degree.

    Greedle
  7. #47
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Songwriter Gulch
    Posts 10,141
    Rep Power 536871379

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    Thus far they've saved a little bit of Music Row but 10 or 15 out of more than 60 studios ain't all that impressive. Nashville is still the touring and publishing capitol of the United States. Songwriters and musicians can move out an hour away.

    I wasn't talking about music people being able to afford it here as much as RE developers going broke as the young programmers move on to the next cheap college town. If young programmers are going to pay big bucks for housing, they might as well live in SF or Berkeley.
    Bob's room 615 562-4346
    Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
    Interview
    Artists are the gatekeepers of truth!- Paul Robeson
  8. #48
    Has Many Personal Intergritys Expensive Boat Anchor
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location New York
    Posts 10,666
    Rep Power 536871396

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    You can argue that it isn't enough, but how could they pay the amounts you have in mind?
    you're joking right?

    so Google is barely profitable and so doesn't have the money to pay more?

    I've said before,
    I can "open a shop" and sell (pick anything), let's say iPhones for $10 each.
    I'm going to sell millions of them soon, as that's a bargain and it's something everyone wants (unless you're one of the morons who wants an imitation iPhone just to show Apple how special you are... but I digress).
    but my "business" is predicated on my getting the iPhones for half that or less (like most of retail), so I "can only pay Apple $5 a phone"...
    I mean: "You can argue that it isn't enough, but how could they pay the amounts you have in mind?"
    right?

    so who is crazy here?
    Apple for charging based on what it costs them to make the phones plus their share of profits for having CREATED the thing that people want?
    Or me, for
    arbitrarily setting a low price just to drive traffic at the clear expense of the creator? (and I mean Apple, not the Flying Spaghetti Monster)

    you're "summing it up" backwards.

    the bottom line is that their 'business model' is only REALLY sustainable if it can make a profit AFTER expenses... they've decided to just basically steal the stuff because they can't make money if they pay fair price for it.


  9. #49
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,778
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    He makes four statements.
    The first is arguably true (especially as to just how much income).
    The second is false. The research paper referenced by Resnikoff was quite clear on this point, which is why I suggested you research it earlier. About 98% of Youtube music content views are of authorised material - in most cases, specifically uploaded by the copyright owners themselves.
    The third is likely true, but of debatable relevance.
    The fourth is false. Over half of the revenue is paid to the rights owners. You can argue that it isn't enough, but how could they pay the amounts you have in mind? If they had to pay more in rights than they made from the ads, they'd simply stop accepting music.
    This is bullshit, based on Resnikoff's deliberately skewing his definition of a "music video" in a disingenuous and deliberately misleading manner. He is apparently excluding the myriad of youtube videos that show nothing more than a record rotating on an old record player, a still photo, a home made collage of stock photos of the artist,. a simple printing of the lyrics while the song plays, or kitten/puppy/baby/etc. videos or stills as "music videos. I other words, he only counts material uploaded by by artist or the artist's representatives which is a relatively small percentage of the material on the site.

    There's also the small matter of youtube's condoning "downloader" programs which allow users to made copies of the content onto their own computers, which is blatantly illegal. Youtube actually places advertising for these illegal programs on videos on the site, meaning that not only do they condone this blatant piracy, they actually profit from it.

    It's not as if music is even a large part of their business, it apparently accounts for about 12% of total views.
    Which is another disingenuous lie - COMMERCIAL music videos may only account for 12%, but "videos" employing full music soundtracks to essentially superfluous visuals accounts for a huge majority. But they don't count those as "music videos".
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  10. #50
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Location Songwriter Gulch
    Posts 10,141
    Rep Power 536871379

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    ...they've decided to just basically steal the stuff because they can't make money if they pay fair price for it.
    They'll make their money in the stock market until investors catch on that it's a huge Ponzi scheme.
    Bob's room 615 562-4346
    Georgetown Masters 615 254-3233
    Interview
    Artists are the gatekeepers of truth!- Paul Robeson
  11. #51
    Join Date Jan 2015
    Location Northern Colorado
    Posts 972
    Rep Power 536870974

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    They CAN live nearly anywhere but the ugly reality is that they DON'T. They tend to flock to the cities that they perceive as "hip" and "fun" and consequently destroy the same qualities they ostensibly came for. They're like locusts. They've destroyed San Francisco to a radius of 50 miles from the city, they're well on the way to killing Austin, and it looks like Nashville is next on the list. The only hope for Nashville is that the music industry is so entrenched there that it's going to be hard to kill and that it's a major tourist magnet specifically for music, but if all the new talent is forced to live a long distance from city center, which is what it looked like was happening when I visited to check out properties, it's certainly going to dilute things.
    I've never been so hatefully lumped into a "they" or "them" category before. I feel all weird inside...

    -r
    Sign Here

    X________________________________________________
  12. #52
    D minor, the saddest of keys! Wing Commander!!
    Join Date Jul 2011
    Location Wellington NZ
    Posts 831
    Rep Power 469762090

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    Sorry, but this is not what the article says.
    The article is wrong.

    Indeed, "music videos" are mostly uploaded via copyright holders, but music videos are actually a small part of Youtube music content, as you call it.
    There are tons of albums uploaded in their entirety on Youtube. You can easily use Youtube instead of Spotify or Google Play as totally free music player. There are also tons of music used as a background. Sometimes this music is taken down but definitely far from always.
    The copyright holder gets the "monetisation" from the vast majority of those other videos. I suspect they looked at the current sales figures for the (usually old) albums and decided that something was better than nothing. As for background music, it's pretty hard nowadays to post a video with infringing music without it being flagged, even if the music presence is incidental / unintentional. This is balanced by an increasing amount of music being specifically made available for use as background music.
    "We hear what we see." - Doris Day
  13. #53
    D minor, the saddest of keys! Wing Commander!!
    Join Date Jul 2011
    Location Wellington NZ
    Posts 831
    Rep Power 469762090

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    you're joking right?

    so Google is barely profitable and so doesn't have the money to pay more?

    ...
    you're "summing it up" backwards.

    the bottom line is that their 'business model' is only REALLY sustainable if it can make a profit AFTER expenses... they've decided to just basically steal the stuff because they can't make money if they pay fair price for it.
    If they really were "stealing it", "the industry" would have had them in court long ago. I also note "the industry" is by far the most prolific uploader of music to Youtube. Do they write it off to promotional expenses? (Which the artist ends up paying for... )
    "We hear what we see." - Doris Day
  14. #54
    D minor, the saddest of keys! Wing Commander!!
    Join Date Jul 2011
    Location Wellington NZ
    Posts 831
    Rep Power 469762090

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    They'll make their money in the stock market until investors catch on that it's a huge Ponzi scheme.
    How does that work, Bob? They make hard cash (from the advertisers), not stock value.
    "We hear what we see." - Doris Day
  15. #55
    Join Date Nov 2006
    Posts 5,361
    Rep Power 536871219

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    The copyright holder gets the "monetisation" from the vast majority of those other videos.
    Care to back up this claim?
    What about indies?
    For example I found few tracks and a music video of my own band uploaded by different people, but I'm not on label, not from US or Europe (or NZ/Aus for that matter) and there's no way for me to uphold my copyright.
    And I don't think that people who've uploaded our stuff are making any money from it, but Google clearly does. All those nanocents do add up. There's thousands of artists in the same scenario.
    I suspect they looked at the current sales figures for the (usually old) albums and decided that something was better than nothing. As for background music, it's pretty hard nowadays to post a video with infringing music without it being flagged, even if the music presence is incidental / unintentional. This is balanced by an increasing amount of music being specifically made available for use as background music.
    Earlier catalog sales were a good part of the income, and some of this money went for artist development. Yes, in current situation it might be easier to through that off or just any breadcrumbs left over.
    But who did create the current situation?

    If they really were "stealing it", "the industry" would have had them in court long ago. I also note "the industry" is by far the most prolific uploader of music to Youtube. Do they write it off to promotional expenses? (Which the artist ends up paying for... )
    I don't see labels using Youtube any differently than Radio/MTV were used before.
    Upon new album release a song or two gets uploaded and possibly a sampler, and that's it.
    But I do see a host of full albums everywhere over Youtube. I wonder why Google itself supports it as it is a direct competition to Google Play.
    You keep coming back talking about "music" when in reality it's mostly "music videos", a much more limited subset.

    As for myself, I don't view Google/Facebook as "evil" by intent. It's just that the nature of the business (generating clicks for Ad revenue) does not coincide with artist interests. Labels were not without their flaws, but that system worked much better for artists.

    Actually, as of now, only majors can get any sensible income from internet. What was talked as a means for democratization ended up promoting inequality.

    For band who starts up the only use for internet is promotion, but even that is not working too well for various reasons. See this thread.
    When in doubt, mumble!

    EVERYTHING SOUNDS LIKE SHIT IF YA LISTEN LONG AND HARD ENOUGH.
  16. #56
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,778
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Forget AT&T. The Real Monopolies Are Google and Facebook

    If they really were "stealing it", "the industry" would have had them in court long ago.)
    Absolutely wrong. It costs MONEY to go to court - LOTS of MONEY. Most of the infringed parties have little or no money.

    Can an indie band that loses money on every tour and has to crowdfund their next release afford to mount a court case against a company like Google?

    No, they cannot.

    Even major labels can't afford the cost of a court action against Google. Google's income for a year is many times the income of the ENTIRE RECORD INDUSTRY! All they have to do is keep stalling until their opponent goes bankrupt. This is why the major labels have been forced into unfavorable contracts with Google - litigation is not an option when you're dealing with a company that can simply wait and starve you out.

    I also note "the industry" is by far the most prolific uploader of music to Youtube. Do they write it off to promotional expenses? (Which the artist ends up paying for...
    "The Industry" is NOT the most prolific uploader to Youtube. Well, if you're talking about the most prolific INDIVIDUAL uploader, sure, but the most music uploaded is done by thousands, if not millions of individual uploaders, so saying the ""the industry is by far the most prolific uploader of music to Youtube." is at best deliberately disingenuous (giving you the benefit of the doubt) and in reality intentionally misleading propaganda (on the part of the people giving the "statistics" you're quoting.

    Do those thousands, if not millions of individuals get "monetized"? Well, no, probably not. Maybe a few have "channels" that receive a pittance, but it's insignificant. Do the content owners get anything? No, not to speak of. They can't afford to chase Google for the money. Heck, they can't even afford the time to chase down every infringing use of their property. Where does the money go? I'll give you a hint - it starts with "G" and has six letters.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts