Slashdot Mirror
Google Releases Study Defending YouTube's Value To Music Biz; Trade Bodies Hit Back (billboard.com)
The ongoing tussle between YouTube and the music industry took a new turn this week when Google assured everyone that its video platform doesn't have any negative impact on the other streaming music services -- despite all the free music it offers. From a report: A Google-commissioned report into how YouTube impacts on the wider music economy has -- somewhat unsurprisingly -- found that the hugely popular, yet much-maligned platform significantly drives sales and stops users from visiting pirate music services. According to a European study carried out by RBB Economics, if music content was removed from YouTube around 85 percent of the time that users spend on the platform would switch to lower value channels, such as TV, radio or internet radio. RBB claimed there would also be a significant increase in time spent listening to pirated content (up 29 percent), while only 15 percent of heavy users, defined as someone who watches more than 20 hours of music videos per month, would switch to higher value offerings like subscription streaming services. In the U.K., that number increases to 19 percent; in France it's 12 percent. [...] In response, music trade bodies poured scorn on the paper's findings. "Google's latest publicity push once again seeks to distract from the fact that YouTube, essentially the world's largest on-demand music service, is failing to license music on a fair basis and compensate artists and producers properly by claiming it is not liable for the music it is making available," reads a statement from IFPI. "Services like YouTube, that are not licensing music on fair terms, hinder the development of a sustainably healthy digital music market," claimed the international trade body, repeating its regular call for tighter regulation around safe harbour licensing.
There's also the fact that the artist that made the music you are listening to isn't being paid, and if they cant get paid often enough, they can't make any more songs for you to like. They are not indentured servants that exist solely for your entertainment. Google are slime, and their logic would make a troll smack its forehead. They are also hypocrites of the highest order: they themselves are attempting to bring the wrath of God down on Waymo for doing in essence the same thing they are trying to defend here. Rationalize all you like, but don't kid yourself about their ethics.
I'm no fan of Alphabet, but the music industry just had its best year in 20 thanks to streaming and digital music. Youtube is a big part of that ecosystem. The music industry may have legit complaints, but digital music hurting them isn't one of them.
I listen to the same song again and again. The artist got paid once.
I buy CD's used. The artists doesn't get paid there.
I share CD's. Guess what -- the artist doesn't get paid.
Quit playing the "starving artist isn't get paid" card -- because there are numerous legal examples.
Maybe you missed the memo that the RIAA are the the biggest thieves -- NOT the consumers.
People who pirate regularly spend MORE on films and BUY more.
Google is not different from anyone else. You are conflating the (free) distribution of music on YouTube as if it is the ONLY source of income. This is false. Artists aren't making a living off of YouTube even if ZERO of their music is "pirated."
--
Fuck You Red Cross for hijacking the + operator and the color red hundreds of years AFTER the Templars.