More Musicians Pissed Off Over Their Own Music Videos Being Taken Off YouTube
from the nice-job,-labels... dept
Eric points us to yet another story of yet another artist getting pissed off that his own videos have been pulled from YouTube. The writeup suggests that this is about competing record labels issuing bogus DMCA-style takedowns on artists as a part of their competitive fervor, but I'm not sure that's true in this case. The artist, Calvin Harris, is based in the UK, who is signed to Sony Music. In the UK, due to a royalty dispute, Google has removed all official major label music from the site. So contrary to TechCrunch's reporting, it seems that this may just be collateral damage of the silly royalty dispute, rather than nefarious competitors issuing bogus takedowns. Still, the point remains: this dispute, which the music industry claims is to "help" artists, is actually doing exactly the opposite.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: calvin harris, copyright, musicians, piracy, royalties, uk, videos, youtube
Companies: bpi, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Original songs are by Soulseekerz Featuring Kate Smith.
This is a song from a "house" remix album. So not really his music to start with.
Nothing like a whiny guy with limited rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's bad
DMCA takedowns have gone too far when this is even a reasonable possibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Labels Obsolete
Unless a label is 1000% behind your act, and promotes the shit out of your stuff to the public, then you're screwed.
Small-time, big-label artists who are signed but marginalized by the label, stand to lose out big time when their low-level attention by the label locks them out of other possibilities.
Solution?
Go it alone unless you are U2. No one will ban *your* videos, and you stand a better chance of success through viral publicity alone than you do through *established channels* when those channels are locked up in foolish posturing and IP protectionism.
Seriously kids, at least *try* the home-rolled publicity model before taking the Venture Crapital Big Label Money.
Unless you're the next Guns 'N Roses, you won't get much in the way of benefit, and you stand to LOSE BIG TIME when your material can't be seen/heard by the public due to your contractual agreement with an organization that's in a deathgrip with new media, new ideas, and new business models.
It's your art. Lock it up at your peril.
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Labels Obsolete
Do you want to help??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Labels Obsolete
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Labels Obsolete
I have been self-promoting for a while now, and it is a struggle. But I have also turned down label offers that would have required me to give up control of my catalog and my publishing, and I just didn't trust it. Am I glad I did? Who knows, I'm not sure how to work the "new model" either, and I can't seem to break even, let alone get ahead financially. It seems like a dark time for independent artists with no startup capital, no matter how clever your Facebook page is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Er?
The ENTIRE government of the UK has been signed by Sony? That seems like a bad plan all around. I now hate the UK, and based on the whole Britain's Got Talent show, I'm not sure what Sony's getting out of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Er?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Its just the same rick-white-man entitlement that many of these Anonymous cowards portray. "You have to be a big star before your music is legitimate".
Im gonna say this straight. Y'all a bunch of middle aged crackers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And you might one day move out of mom's basement.
As for Daft Punk, as they aspire to create something new (rather than just remixing someone else's song and claiming it as they own) they are certainly further up the ladder than a house DJ. But in the end, it's the differences between the sub-sub basement and just the basement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Says the person whose handle is Mechwarrior, I can only assume you're asian then? Some threat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Bastardizing a song does not make it yours.
Using samples of course is legitimate if you are creating something original - the Beastie Boys manage to create highly original work while using many samples so it is possible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To be fair ...
For what it's worth, my source is 'very well connected in the music industry' (although I would say that, right) and is very serious about the DMCA background fights among records labels.
I'll try to get more information out of him and do a separate post. Thanks for picking up the thread, Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: To be fair ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: To be fair ...
Cool. Would definitely like to know more about rivals taking down via DMCA if you come across any evidence of it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And yes, calvin harris is an artist, as are many big-name djs. That's how they get big-name usually. Good electro/house/trance/etc. music remixes are a lot more complex than the hip hop *play two tracks over one another*.
That being said, not that big of a fan of calvin harris, it's just ridiculous how some people treat mixed music without thinking it through.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He doesn't even understand where he stands himself, so his outrage is rather misguided. Again, he could have easily secured the rights (probably nothing more than a simple request back to the original artist, which he is obviously in contact with) and all things would have been fine.
As for "Oh wait, this is techdirt, most people here have never even been out of the basement, let alone gone downtown to a good nightclub.", please. Been there, done that, got the crappy t-shirt, played the records, mixed the tunes, install the sound and lighting systems, restocked the beer and escorted drunks out the door. Just being intelligent and able to post logical arguments on Techdirt doesn't turn us all into anti-social basement dwellers. Perhaps you may remember a time when mixing wasn't done with samples and pre-recorded segements - which is something very very few "DJs" actually can do today. Most of them are entirely dependant on thier little beat matching software and their pre-made cut-ups.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
All that to say that music trends are like hemlines, they come and go. The difference in longevity and durability is usually found in the true musical artistry, not the ability to match up a couple of samples or program simple patterns into a sequencer. I got bored playing with trance music back with Reason 2.x, it was way too simplistic and formulatic, and could be made by anyone, even a non-musician.
So a remix "artist" is a musician like a plumber is an architect. They both work on buildings, but other than that, there is very little similar.
The true point is that the "music" he claims as his isn't really his to start with, but someone else's work. Seeing a remix artist get all huffy is like reading a keyboard warrior puffing on a chat board. Amusing, but usually misaimed. You might want to read the story and recheck your sights, you missed the target by a fair bit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Usual AC crap. By your logic, Hyden, Beethoven, Bach and all the other classic composers did not make any music. Neither did most of the rock'n'roll musicians.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
How on Earth did you arrive at this conclusion? Please elucidate on your *reasoning* oh great sage, because it sure doesn't follow from what AC said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop Signing the Contracts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Im gonna say this straight. Y'all a bunch of middle aged crackers."
_____________
And you're a racist black guy.
You anger the ghost of Martin Luther King!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Louis CK and Joe Rogan have the right method
No parasitic feral life form stealing everything in the middle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]