Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Expands Music Credits: Makes It Easier To Identify the Song Featured in a Video (pitchfork.com)
Next time you hear a song featured in a YouTube video and you are not sure what it is called, or who made it, you can find out by clicking (or tapping) the "show more" button. From a report: YouTube has announced that the platform is expanding the credits available on videos featuring music. The new description feature, called "Music in this video," provides credits -- which includes artist, songwriter, label, and publisher -- on both music videos and fan-uploaded content that contains recorded music. This feature will also include a link to available official artist channels and official music videos. The expanded credits are made possible by Content ID, a YouTube system that uses copyright owners' information and a database of files to identify and manage content.
It makes it easier for RIAA to monetize your videos. Trump would say this is just smart business.
You have a very bad bug eating you. Fight it off.
I don't think I've bought a song without previewing it on YouTube. I've found new songs previewing them on genre collections of music videos. YouTube sells music so helping identify songs is great for artists.
YouTube should move into direct sales. Click a tab to add a song to the cart.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
They've been around long enough, there's so many lacking features.
Where is multi-channel audio for a start?
Why can't end users help contribute to subtitles?
Why isn't there multiple subtitle track options?
When will they offer multi-video streams? (diff camera angles for example on some videos)
When can there be chaptering added to videos?
That's off the top of my head in about 30 seconds. I regularly think of fairly decent features they could / should add to the platform.
This is google, they're utterly huge, I'd say they now put out, probably the most amount of video of any business on earth. Why is the platform not improving?
Their UI people just fiddle and break and ruin shit (google news) or they terminate perfectly good services. https://www.wordstream.com/blo...
They have stuffed up chat / sms / web based chat options for nearly 10 years now, failing to copy things they should copy, re-making t hings that didn't need to be remade, etc. Their chat platform is insanely incredibly mind boggingly short shortsightedly ridiculously bad! (I recall when Google chat was THE way to chat with most pals)
These guys sit on their laurels for things they should be fixing and they break things they should be leaving alone.
Honestly just... ugh. Please can someone come along and compete?
If someone has claimed rights on the music then Google should be giving us an easy way to contact them - either to tell them they're wrong, to licence the music or to tell them to stop stealing our content with their abusive policies.
But that would mean Google looking out for consumer interests, so I wont hold my breath waiting.
My question would be whether they'll help solve an ongoing problem for performers: It can be very difficult to learn who wrote a tune or song, who owns the rights to it, etc. The "business" sources for this info are often incomplete, or just wrong. To see the problem, try searching for the composer of songs. You tend to get links to sites that say things of the form "[Song Title] by [Person]". But when you investigate, you find that "by" usually means "performed by" or "recorded by". They rarely distinguish this from "composed by", and very rarely is the actual composer mentioned. The main problem is that song and tune titles are often different, and over the years different songs/tunes have been written with the same (or very similar) titles. If they were written in different countries, it can be very difficult to straighten out the mess. Sometimes a title belongs to dozens (or hundreds) of different musical works. A slightly less important problem is that several composers may have the same name. One of the fun conversations I've had with a number of publishers is asking them how I can figure out which tunes (or songs) they own the publishing rights to. When they say I can look up the titles in their indexes, I have to point out what they certainly know, that most of those titles are not unique to them, and other companies have published different works with the same titles. Their final answer is always the same: All I have to do is buy a copy of every (musical) publication in their catalog. Yeah, and when I've done that for every publisher in every country, and bought a new house big enough to hold them all, I'll have the info. But I'll have a slight problem: Each answer will be inside millions of printed books, which will take me years to search for each title. But this does get across why the system is so messed up and unusable: Publishers (and composers) have a financial interest in making the information difficult to find. The only way that's actually workable is to publish your own version of a musical work, and wait until someone sues you. This has some subtle problems of its own, of course, but it's what maximizes the actual publishers' incomes. ;-)
Somehow, I sorta doubt that youtube will ever figure out how to put correct composer info with every song in every video. Or even in a minority subset of them. They certainly won't get the correct names from many of the people making the videos; they'll just get "by [Performer Name]".
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.