They believe they are providing Google with content and Google is profiting off their content. Google isn't sharing the money with them, and they feel entitled to it. Simple as that.
For starters, it's rarely the artists making these negotiations. It's one big corporate music label negotiating with a big corporate television network. Each is trying to get the best deal from the other one, which includes limiting use of the music as much as possible by only allowing it for broadcast but not for sale (which up through the 80s was almost unheard of for TV shows, largely because there was no efficient means to package that much material).
In other words, it's all about how middle men divide up culture into as many little pieces as possible so they can sell it off a piece at a time. You would think the right to use a song in a TV show would extend to all uses of that TV show into the future, but sadly those are different pieces with different price tags.
And the big corporations like it this way because it keeps little people out of their business and gives them an excuse to hire lots of lawyers and middle men.
It wasn't a big deal when the big corporations controlled the means of distribution, but now the internet lets anybody distribute music and video, and that's why copyright is such an issue for them. They can't do anything without the proper contracts being signed, but the little people are going around publishing material left and right.
Anyone that records a video of someone playing a song or puts a song in their video needs a sync license unless they can make a case for fair use, which can only be determined in a court of law.
That's why Youtube is becoming a graveyard of taken down videos.
This could only work if EVERY business did it and did it at the same time. Otherwise the government would hit each individual business hard (and go after the individuals running that business). Only a collective and very public action against government intrusion would be effective.
And don't forget that up until the 2000s, big business was routinely painted as evil. Nobody would trust them when they complained about what the government was doing. Now suddenly Yahoo has turned all Kim Dotcom and become heroes thanks to the government's malevolence.
It's a simple numbers game. Once the spreadsheet shows that sports can make more money offering their own subscriptions rather than offering subscriptions through cable, they'll ditch cable in a millisecond.
I think the biggest impediment to all this has been getting streaming and online content onto people's big screens instead of their computer screen, and they're finally making that happen.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
By your logic, torrenting isn't free either because you have to have pay for a computer and an internet connection and it requires bandwith, and you have to give your attention to ads on the torrent sites.
But yeah, let's keep redefining what you mean by free until it only fits the narrow logic you need to make your pointless point that Mike endorses piracy.
On the post: Jimmy Kimmel Joins John Oliver In Explaining Net Neutrality
Re: Re:
On the post: Only Surviving Recording Of The Very First Superbowl Is Because A Fan Recorded It, But You Can't See It, Because Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Rupert Murdoch's News Corp: Still Failing To Understand The Internet After 20 Years Of Flops
Re:
On the post: Rupert Murdoch's News Corp: Still Failing To Understand The Internet After 20 Years Of Flops
Re:
Anyone that relies on mainstream media for news deserves their ignorance.
On the post: Only Surviving Recording Of The Very First Superbowl Is Because A Fan Recorded It, But You Can't See It, Because Copyright
Re: Re:
On the post: Only Surviving Recording Of The Very First Superbowl Is Because A Fan Recorded It, But You Can't See It, Because Copyright
Re: Wait, what?
On the post: New Study Confirms: Internet Is Contributing To Massive Profit Levels At Legacy Entertainment Firms
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Re: Re: Re: Just Curious
On the post: Brands Use Trademark To Get Toronto To Pull Clever Anti-Litter Campaign Just Because
Re: Re: Re: PR for Idiots: Extend leg, pull out gun, aim at foot, pull trigger
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just Curious
In other words, it's all about how middle men divide up culture into as many little pieces as possible so they can sell it off a piece at a time. You would think the right to use a song in a TV show would extend to all uses of that TV show into the future, but sadly those are different pieces with different price tags.
And the big corporations like it this way because it keeps little people out of their business and gives them an excuse to hire lots of lawyers and middle men.
It wasn't a big deal when the big corporations controlled the means of distribution, but now the internet lets anybody distribute music and video, and that's why copyright is such an issue for them. They can't do anything without the proper contracts being signed, but the little people are going around publishing material left and right.
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Most likely nothing after that exchange, but unfortunately few people have Letterman's bankroll to so brazenly break the law.
And really, Dave, "Life in the Fast Lane" is your song, isn't it?
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Just Curious
On the post: David Letterman Mocks The Eagles Over Refusal To License Their Music
Re: Just Curious
That's why Youtube is becoming a graveyard of taken down videos.
On the post: More Yahoo vs. The NSA: Government Tried To Deny Standing, Filed Supporting Documents Yahoo Never Got To See
Re:
And don't forget that up until the 2000s, big business was routinely painted as evil. Nobody would trust them when they complained about what the government was doing. Now suddenly Yahoo has turned all Kim Dotcom and become heroes thanks to the government's malevolence.
On the post: California Continues To Be Anti-Innovation: Tells Ridesharing Services That Carpooling Is Illegal
Re: Re: Re: Re: It is not ridesharing, it is transport for hire
On the post: Another Actor From 'Innocence Of Muslims' Sues Google Over Copyright Claim... Via Same Lawyer As Cindy Garcia
Re: If it were titled
On the post: California Continues To Be Anti-Innovation: Tells Ridesharing Services That Carpooling Is Illegal
Re:
On the post: Study: Cable Cutting To Continue, Especially As Millennials Age
I think the biggest impediment to all this has been getting streaming and online content onto people's big screens instead of their computer screen, and they're finally making that happen.
On the post: U2 Still Insists No Value In 'Free' Music, Despite Making Millions From It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free is in the eye of beholder
But yeah, let's keep redefining what you mean by free until it only fits the narrow logic you need to make your pointless point that Mike endorses piracy.
Next >>