- Share This Post
- submit
- 0
-
Sparkle (0)
If you're a frequent user of YouTube -- and who among us isn't these days -- you may have noticed that some of your favorite videos have gone strangely silent. According to a post on Wired magazine's blog, Warner Brothers, home to popular artists like Madonna and Seal, claims that it wasn't being paid enough for its music on YouTube, and demanded that YouTube remove all of its music from the site. However, there is a creative solution:
YouTube is now muting the audio tracks on some of those tracks, leaving the video online.
The article goes on to say that, "The muting appears to be part of Google's response to the label's demand that they pull all of its tracks, because it wants more money for them than Google is willing to pay. Some tracks by these artists still play with sound, so this appears to be an ongoing process as YouTube identifies the tracks." (A Warner spokesperson later pointed out that the muting policy was Google's way of removing the content at the label's request.)So what does this mean for YouTube users, particularly bloggers who embed videos on their sites? Well, for one, views for even the "official" videos could stop accumulating views which would draw users away from the site in general. It's no secret that some bloggers, like Lynnster from Lynnster's Music Zone have found themselves embroiled in RIAA, as well as label, conflicts:
The only thing I really have to report is I’m in the midst of a copyright battle with YouTube over the Scarce videos. Well, I’m really not personally at this point - their manager is now on the case after I alerted her to the situation.
The difference with this YouTube thing is I not only have permission (and the videos were labeled as such) but was basically acting as a representative of the band and posting the videos at their behest, so really no different than if they themselves had personally posted them - and likely would have, sadly, gotten slapped with the same copyright block.
Tinycatpants, also, had some pretty strong opinions about the RIAA's stranglehold over their content:
I know everyone knows the problem, but let me just reiterate it. Whether or not it’s true, everyone assumes that record companies have artists trapped in unfair contracts in which the record companies get rich and only a very lucky few artists do. Music piracy doesn’t feel like stealing; it feels like sticking it to the record companies. After all, we are showing our solidarity to the artist, by listening to her music. Having the record companies, or another big faceless entity like the RIAA, go after children doesn’t do much to show the general public that those attitudes are wrong.
This isn't the first time Warner Brothers has butted heads with a popular social networking site. Last year, I blogged about Last.fm's problems with the label. But the implications of this could be huge unless a compromise is worked out.
