Music Licensing Firm Offers Cheap Licenses For YouTube Videos
from the but,-um,-what-about-free? dept
The New York Times is reporting that music licensing firm Rumblefish is trying to help people making YouTube videos avoid takedowns or the dreaded YouTube ContentID "silencing" by offering music that can be licensed for YouTube videos at $1.99 per song (for non-commercial purposes only). While it's at least somewhat good to see music licensing firms recognizing that this market isn't going to buy hugely expensive licenses, and trying to adjust to handle this new market, it sort of ignores the fact that there are still a ton of Creative Commons and similarly licensed (or public domain) music out there that they can use. Since the Rumblefish catalog in this offer doesn't include any major label music or "big name" artists, it seems like those who might be interested in such a thing could probably find just as good, if not better, Creative Commons-licensed music. On top of that, this is the same Rumblefish who caused some problems last year when it claimed licensing rights over some public domain music, pissing off a bunch of YouTube users.
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: licensing, music, youtube
Companies: rumblefish
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Magnatune
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Magnatune
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Magnatune
Magnatune Site
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Magnatune
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Magnatune
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ok explain time
if its what i have to pay then its $1.89 too much
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ok explain time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ok explain time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ok explain time
This one.
I, too, agree the amount of money is too much. Any amount is too much.
What should be done, instead, is those using music in their videos be required to acknowledge the performer, song writer, and the song title.
Content is the ad for the product. If people like the song, then the required acknowledgment has potential to increase sales in other venues if people put the value in the song to want to own a copy of it.
This "license" is nothing more than another attempt at paying far too many people who didn't write or perform the song to begin with. Insulting, to say the least.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ok explain time
Which is exactly the conditions that Magnatune ask for.
http://magnatune.com/
License info here
http://magnatune.com/info/cc_licensed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ok explain time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ok explain time
Plus you can officially share any purchased album with 3 friends.
Plus they have a "No DRM ever" pledge
Plus - they won't pursue you even if you share more than the official 3x - they say " we just hope you will feel bad about it".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ok explain time
Yes, you do. Just checked out the site. The second I tried accessing a download, it asks me to be a member.
For $180/year, I'll pass.
In addition, my opinion doesn't give a damn about copyright or CC restrictions.
One of these days, artists will realize the only control they have is how to make money. Once in the public domain, they have no control no matter what the hell they think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ok explain time
However if you look further down the page for the place where it says:
"Play all tracks as an m3u audio stream (or xspf, ogg, mp3 file" Right click on "mp3" and then "save link" and it will let you download the (lower quality) file for free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't think so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What differentiates two videos using the same copyrighted song (which you've already bought mind you), where one has obtained this (ridiculously expensive) license from Rumblefish and the other hasn't?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hasn't Youtube already made deals with some Record Lables
http://goo.gl/sl35
and with YouTube editor you can add songs for free
http://www.youtube.com/editor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hasn't Youtube already made deals with some Record Lables
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIPOFF
Don't use other peoples music. You can find hundreds of indie bands that don't believe in this bullshit, use their music. Don't pay the thieves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The potential scam
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take so time
Take action to put these asshats out of work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what's next?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
licensing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Search Engine for RFM
Just a note: Meanwhile there is a search engine for royalty free music out there: http://audiobello.com
All the best
Rainer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]