Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you take!
- Thread starter manirios
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
They don't loose money from it, people will still purchase said track once it's released. The only thing, as far as I can tell, that gets ruined is the 'mystery' behind a tune.
You also say channel owners should contact labels before uploading a dub, but 9 times out of 10 its unknown who has signed the track.
Also what exactly is a promo schedule? Uploading a clip to Soundcloud 2 weeks before a release?
(Not having a go Blu Mar Ten these are genuine questions)
Hertz Promo, I completely agree with you about uploading full tunes that have already been released, as like I said tonnes of people will rip these from youtube and the label looses money. Im talking about clips of forthcoming and unreleased tunes.
I can see where you're coming from, and I don't want to be a dick about it, but what harm, honestly, does uploading a 2 minute mixcut of a track really do to a label? Apart from maybe giving away an ID.
They don't loose money from it, people will still purchase said track once it's released. The only thing, as far as I can tell, that gets ruined is the 'mystery' behind a tune.
You also say channel owners should contact labels before uploading a dub, but 9 times out of 10 its unknown who has signed the track.
Also what exactly is a promo schedule? Uploading a clip to Soundcloud 2 weeks before a release?
(Not having a go Blu Mar Ten these are genuine questions)
Hertz Promo, I completely agree with you about uploading full tunes that have already been released, as like I said tonnes of people will rip these from youtube and the label looses money. Im talking about clips of forthcoming and unreleased tunes.
blumarten
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
but hang on... you seem to be saying because you can't see why it might be desirable then you should therefore have the right to distribute material that isn't yours as you see fit, without even bothering to wait to get permission.
That's a pretty bold position.
but hang on... you seem to be saying because you can't see why it might be desirable then you should therefore have the right to distribute material that isn't yours as you see fit, without even bothering to wait to get permission.
That's a pretty bold position.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
I suppose I did say that, and okay enough about what I think! But can you, as an artist and a label, see any genuine problems with it?
blumarten
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
yes absolutely.. they are many and various, but they are not universally applicable to all labels in all situations. everything is constantly shifting for everyone, all the time, which is why it's not the place for an uploader to second-guess what's 'best' for a release.
yes absolutely.. they are many and various, but they are not universally applicable to all labels in all situations. everything is constantly shifting for everyone, all the time, which is why it's not the place for an uploader to second-guess what's 'best' for a release.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
I got a ton of respect for anyone that puts the work in to get a dnb label up and running, I'm sure it's probably a thankless task most of the time. but the way I see it when someone uploads a clip of a tune that's not out yet it genuinely isn't an attempt to scam the label or the artist, it's more like 'woah check this shit out, anyone know the ID, when's it released?' and I don't see (yep that phrase again!) how that's harmful.
fair enough... but I know loads of labels/artists do currently use soundcloud to promo clips out, and seem to be operating fine this way
I got a ton of respect for anyone that puts the work in to get a dnb label up and running, I'm sure it's probably a thankless task most of the time. but the way I see it when someone uploads a clip of a tune that's not out yet it genuinely isn't an attempt to scam the label or the artist, it's more like 'woah check this shit out, anyone know the ID, when's it released?' and I don't see (yep that phrase again!) how that's harmful.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2010
- Location
- West London
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Bit of a politician's answer tbh Mr Ten and I think he deserved better than that. I get the bit about not allowing others to 'guess what's best' for your property but assuming the underlying driving force behind any label is pretty much to maximise sales can you point to the actual harm in what Sicx was doing? And why did you turn it into 'distributing' when he was talking about streaming two minute clips?
Feels like as a producer and label owner you'd rather keep the whole 'they have their reasons' thing going when the more honest 'they want to keep their plays' is probably closer to the truth. Pffft.
Bit of a politician's answer tbh Mr Ten and I think he deserved better than that. I get the bit about not allowing others to 'guess what's best' for your property but assuming the underlying driving force behind any label is pretty much to maximise sales can you point to the actual harm in what Sicx was doing? And why did you turn it into 'distributing' when he was talking about streaming two minute clips?
Feels like as a producer and label owner you'd rather keep the whole 'they have their reasons' thing going when the more honest 'they want to keep their plays' is probably closer to the truth. Pffft.
Last edited:
sonicjunglist
Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2010
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Youtube is just bollocks in general nowadays
Youtube is just bollocks in general nowadays
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Location
- Decin, Czech Republic
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
I don't want to dispute any of those claims as I agree the rights belong to the labels/producers.
But there's one other thing there I think labels (and especially those catering to a smaller target audience) seem to overlook. Most of the people buying this music are dedicated fans visiting forums like this (or blogs or whatever) who share the passion to talk about dubs, finding clips in mixes etc. And from my own experience, I'm much more likely to buy a tune I've already developed some bond with prior to the release date. With all due respect, browsing tons of soundcloud clips, major youtube channel uploads, newsletters of digital distributors and skimming through facebook pages 2-4 weeks before the release or on the release date doesn't work a treat as there's just too many to keep up. On the other hand coming here, seeing a new thread with some mix/radio show rip uploaded to youtube a few months before the release thus having a possibility to listen repeatedly for some time catches my attention much more likely.
So even though I respect the rights of the labels/producers and I'm not doing it myself, I'm glad someone else does upload a rip to youtube. I can hear a tune out enough before the release date to make up my mind properly whether I like it (and want to buy it) or not as opposed to deciding based upon hearing out a clip on the site I'm scanning through every Monday for new releases as it's pretty easy to overlook a tune there or not being convinced by that "funneled-through-a-shoe" audio available there.
In other words I'm pretty sure that if labels would put up some radio show rips on soundcloud/youtube by themselves when there's the possibility to do so (even though it's not a 2-weeks-to-release-date-countdown yet) it would pretty much solve the issue.
I don't want to dispute any of those claims as I agree the rights belong to the labels/producers.
But there's one other thing there I think labels (and especially those catering to a smaller target audience) seem to overlook. Most of the people buying this music are dedicated fans visiting forums like this (or blogs or whatever) who share the passion to talk about dubs, finding clips in mixes etc. And from my own experience, I'm much more likely to buy a tune I've already developed some bond with prior to the release date. With all due respect, browsing tons of soundcloud clips, major youtube channel uploads, newsletters of digital distributors and skimming through facebook pages 2-4 weeks before the release or on the release date doesn't work a treat as there's just too many to keep up. On the other hand coming here, seeing a new thread with some mix/radio show rip uploaded to youtube a few months before the release thus having a possibility to listen repeatedly for some time catches my attention much more likely.
So even though I respect the rights of the labels/producers and I'm not doing it myself, I'm glad someone else does upload a rip to youtube. I can hear a tune out enough before the release date to make up my mind properly whether I like it (and want to buy it) or not as opposed to deciding based upon hearing out a clip on the site I'm scanning through every Monday for new releases as it's pretty easy to overlook a tune there or not being convinced by that "funneled-through-a-shoe" audio available there.
In other words I'm pretty sure that if labels would put up some radio show rips on soundcloud/youtube by themselves when there's the possibility to do so (even though it's not a 2-weeks-to-release-date-countdown yet) it would pretty much solve the issue.
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2010
- Location
- West London
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
I think Vaclav makes some valid points.
I think Vaclav makes some valid points.
blumarten
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
well firstly.. taking a piece of content, placing it on a platform where it can receive an unlimited number of plays is an act of distribution.
"streaming two minute clips" is a description of the delivery mechanism, not the act... hence my rephrase.
secondly, the reason i was not too specific about details is that, as i said before, it varies from label to label and from release to release. It's not my place to speak for the entire scene... mainly because everyone's situations are relatively unique. I could write 500 words detailing all the various problems that it can cause, but I think a simpler approach is to say that if you can't imagine what the problems are and you have to ask then you should probably check with someone before you go uploading tracks to youtube.
Thirdly, please don't put words in my mouth and look for conspiracies where there are none. 'Keeping our plays' might mean something to some labels and absolutely nothing to others. We are mostly in the second camp. If someone uploads one of our tracks and we upload the same track to our channel it's actually doubly beneficial to me because we get paid the same rate for both sets of plays. You will note the vast swathes of BMT content uploaded to youtube that we have never had removed. There may be times though where we don't follow this rule and I'll give an example in my last paragraph below.
If you are a much bigger label with a huge subscriber base then it's possible you may have a preferential rate for your channel worked out with youtube, in which case it's in your interest to get rid of all 3rd party uploaded catalogue whether it's before the release date or not.
So to address your first point - "assuming the underlying driving force behind any label is pretty much to maximise sales can you point to the actual harm in what Sicx was doing" - here is an example:
Label X has a big release coming up. They make an arrangement with one of the major youtube channels to host it exclusively with them. That channel is so big that it has a much better payout rate deal with youtube, which benefits not only the channel but also the label and the artists - more plays x better rate per play.
Along comes matey (or possibly dozens of mateys) and pre-empts the whole thing by uploading the tune to their own channel which has no such payout arrangement with youtube. Several things might occur as a result of that - the large youtube channel might decide to can the release on their channel as they no longer have exclusivity. Or... the smaller uploader will start to monopolise the search results because they uploaded first... and every play that lands on them first is a less financially beneficial click than one that would have gone to the larger channel... and so on and so on...
i mean i could go on, but you get the idea. In this example the act of uploading actually costs a label money.
well firstly.. taking a piece of content, placing it on a platform where it can receive an unlimited number of plays is an act of distribution.
"streaming two minute clips" is a description of the delivery mechanism, not the act... hence my rephrase.
secondly, the reason i was not too specific about details is that, as i said before, it varies from label to label and from release to release. It's not my place to speak for the entire scene... mainly because everyone's situations are relatively unique. I could write 500 words detailing all the various problems that it can cause, but I think a simpler approach is to say that if you can't imagine what the problems are and you have to ask then you should probably check with someone before you go uploading tracks to youtube.
Thirdly, please don't put words in my mouth and look for conspiracies where there are none. 'Keeping our plays' might mean something to some labels and absolutely nothing to others. We are mostly in the second camp. If someone uploads one of our tracks and we upload the same track to our channel it's actually doubly beneficial to me because we get paid the same rate for both sets of plays. You will note the vast swathes of BMT content uploaded to youtube that we have never had removed. There may be times though where we don't follow this rule and I'll give an example in my last paragraph below.
If you are a much bigger label with a huge subscriber base then it's possible you may have a preferential rate for your channel worked out with youtube, in which case it's in your interest to get rid of all 3rd party uploaded catalogue whether it's before the release date or not.
So to address your first point - "assuming the underlying driving force behind any label is pretty much to maximise sales can you point to the actual harm in what Sicx was doing" - here is an example:
Label X has a big release coming up. They make an arrangement with one of the major youtube channels to host it exclusively with them. That channel is so big that it has a much better payout rate deal with youtube, which benefits not only the channel but also the label and the artists - more plays x better rate per play.
Along comes matey (or possibly dozens of mateys) and pre-empts the whole thing by uploading the tune to their own channel which has no such payout arrangement with youtube. Several things might occur as a result of that - the large youtube channel might decide to can the release on their channel as they no longer have exclusivity. Or... the smaller uploader will start to monopolise the search results because they uploaded first... and every play that lands on them first is a less financially beneficial click than one that would have gone to the larger channel... and so on and so on...
i mean i could go on, but you get the idea. In this example the act of uploading actually costs a label money.
Last edited:
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
The thing that labels don't seem to understand is that if someone does not generally pay for music, 9.5 times out of 10 if they want a tune, they are going to get that tune on their hard drive one way or another regardless of whether or not joe shmoe uploaded the song on youtube. Someone touched on this already but drum & bass in particular has a very loyal fanbase who are usually more than willing to buy the music if they really want it. In this day and age, trying to rid the internet of all your label's music is pretty much a fool's game because most people could give two shits about copyright. As for messing up the promo schedule, do you really think any song that gets uploaded to Liquicity or any big channel won't get thousands upon thousands of views? The small channels have to start out somewhere ya know. A lot of times labels just seem really butthurt (not necessarily always without good reason) about youtube uploads when most of the people uploading and viewing the videos are extremely passionate about the music.
Just my take, feel free to constructively respond
The thing that labels don't seem to understand is that if someone does not generally pay for music, 9.5 times out of 10 if they want a tune, they are going to get that tune on their hard drive one way or another regardless of whether or not joe shmoe uploaded the song on youtube. Someone touched on this already but drum & bass in particular has a very loyal fanbase who are usually more than willing to buy the music if they really want it. In this day and age, trying to rid the internet of all your label's music is pretty much a fool's game because most people could give two shits about copyright. As for messing up the promo schedule, do you really think any song that gets uploaded to Liquicity or any big channel won't get thousands upon thousands of views? The small channels have to start out somewhere ya know. A lot of times labels just seem really butthurt (not necessarily always without good reason) about youtube uploads when most of the people uploading and viewing the videos are extremely passionate about the music.
Just my take, feel free to constructively respond
blumarten
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
who's said they want to rid the internet of their music? no one's said that. it's not unreasonable to want some small degree of control over how and when the music you're investing in is introduced to the public.
for sure many uploaders are passionate and all that but so are the labels, and the labels invest and risk a lot more time, money and effort than the uploaders do, i can assure you of that.
who's said they want to rid the internet of their music? no one's said that. it's not unreasonable to want some small degree of control over how and when the music you're investing in is introduced to the public.
for sure many uploaders are passionate and all that but so are the labels, and the labels invest and risk a lot more time, money and effort than the uploaders do, i can assure you of that.
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Fair enough, but you have to admit some labels go a bit overboard with it to the point where the most you can find is a minute clip. I know it all comes down to what the label finds fitting but "I dont see" any problem with wanting to hear a full or mostly full clip of a song before purchasing
Fair enough, but you have to admit some labels go a bit overboard with it to the point where the most you can find is a minute clip. I know it all comes down to what the label finds fitting but "I dont see" any problem with wanting to hear a full or mostly full clip of a song before purchasing
blumarten
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
i dunno. if you really can't envisage how it can be problematic i'm not sure what else to say. I can only suggest you try setting up a label and see for yourself.
i dunno. if you really can't envisage how it can be problematic i'm not sure what else to say. I can only suggest you try setting up a label and see for yourself.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2007
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Im not here to sugar coat stuff so if a label/producer is stupid enough to put a full track up as a sample expect that to get ripped.
When labels make us wait 6-12 months for a release, that shit should be illegal !!
How's that for a different view point.
- - - Updated - - -
You are doing it wrong!
Im not here to sugar coat stuff so if a label/producer is stupid enough to put a full track up as a sample expect that to get ripped.
When labels make us wait 6-12 months for a release, that shit should be illegal !!
How's that for a different view point.
- - - Updated - - -
You are doing it wrong!
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Well obviously it would be retarded to put out a full sample before the release date and I certainly wouldn't expect a label to put out a full sample after. But people like full songs (can you blame them?) and they're usually gonna hear it one way or another. If you want to take down a full mix that's perfectly understandable but someone else is probably going to post it right back up in less than a week. not saying that's a good thing, just the way it is, kinda pointless to try and stop them. Although youtube has gone to shit anyway, basically a communist regime
^^and how is that funny?? because fans of other genres are soooo much more loyal
Well obviously it would be retarded to put out a full sample before the release date and I certainly wouldn't expect a label to put out a full sample after. But people like full songs (can you blame them?) and they're usually gonna hear it one way or another. If you want to take down a full mix that's perfectly understandable but someone else is probably going to post it right back up in less than a week. not saying that's a good thing, just the way it is, kinda pointless to try and stop them. Although youtube has gone to shit anyway, basically a communist regime
^^and how is that funny?? because fans of other genres are soooo much more loyal
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
this thread is pretty interesting to read. I once cut a track from a mix and put it on youtube when i first made a channel. Mine was the only one on youtube and i was asked to take it down. I was pretty pissed ín the moment' but after thinking about it, calmed down. How was it affecting me by not being allowed to leave it up? In no way whatsoever. A few thousand people wouldnt listen to 'my'clip on youtube, i can sleep at night knowing that. After one more claim, i decided to delete the channel, because as stated here, its not my music to promote.
In actual fact, the first track that i put up was significantly different upon release to the mixcut, so I can see 100% why the label didn't want it on the internet.
As for starting your own channels, unfortunately there are too many big dogs already established, which as pointed out can offer a lot more than new ones. The time to do it has pretty much passed by, unless you can come up with one thats completely unique to new music trends, your pretty much stuffed imo.
But the bottom line really is, if it's not yours, you dont have the write to do it.
this thread is pretty interesting to read. I once cut a track from a mix and put it on youtube when i first made a channel. Mine was the only one on youtube and i was asked to take it down. I was pretty pissed ín the moment' but after thinking about it, calmed down. How was it affecting me by not being allowed to leave it up? In no way whatsoever. A few thousand people wouldnt listen to 'my'clip on youtube, i can sleep at night knowing that. After one more claim, i decided to delete the channel, because as stated here, its not my music to promote.
In actual fact, the first track that i put up was significantly different upon release to the mixcut, so I can see 100% why the label didn't want it on the internet.
As for starting your own channels, unfortunately there are too many big dogs already established, which as pointed out can offer a lot more than new ones. The time to do it has pretty much passed by, unless you can come up with one thats completely unique to new music trends, your pretty much stuffed imo.
But the bottom line really is, if it's not yours, you dont have the write to do it.
Re: Youtube mix taken down, and now the patronising copyright school they make you ta
Sales of D&B have gone right down the toilet since it became easier to get music for free so I'm not really sure how accurate this is across the board, although there are a reasonable amount of hardcore fans.
I see youtube clips and the like as something I can't stop. I'd rather spend time making music than worrying about taking clips down. It depends on your position though like BMT say. If I was a bit higher up the food chain I'd probably have a different view.
Sales of D&B have gone right down the toilet since it became easier to get music for free so I'm not really sure how accurate this is across the board, although there are a reasonable amount of hardcore fans.
I see youtube clips and the like as something I can't stop. I'd rather spend time making music than worrying about taking clips down. It depends on your position though like BMT say. If I was a bit higher up the food chain I'd probably have a different view.
