Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

EMI, YouTube Strike Music Video Deal

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu May 31, 2007 10:38 PM
from the ebony-and-ivory dept.
eldavojohn writes "Despite initial complaints of copyright infringement, EMI is now striking a deal with YouTube. Perhaps they've noticed that Warner's deal has boded well or they've finally come around to free marketing? From the article, "EMI and YouTube have agreed to work together to develop ways in which EMI-owned recordings can be incorporated into user generated content by YouTube users. News of the deal comes just 10 days after EMI agreed to be taken over by private equity group Terra Firma for £2.4bn." YouTube is slowly building a cadre of friends on the playground while Viacom continues to bully the new kid."

Related Stories

[+] Your Rights Online: Copyright Axe To Fall On YouTube? 295 comments
theoddball writes "In what should come as no great surprise, Universal Music Group is preparing to file suit against YouTube for copyright infringement, the AP reports. Discussions with the site's owners have broken down (although talks are apparently still progressing with Myspace / News Corp over similar issues). From the article: 'We believe these new businesses are copyright infringers and owe us tens of millions of dollars,' Universal Music CEO Doug Morris told investors Wednesday at a conference in Pasadena. This development follows last month's announcement that YouTube is negotiating with labels to legally host videos. While the primary complaint is against music videos, one cannot help but wonder if this will also impact the many, many homemade videos using copyrighted UMG songs as a soundtrack (or — *shudder* — a lipsync.)"
[+] Your Rights Online: Warner Opens Video Library To YouTube 84 comments
Oxen writes, "From the article, 'Warner Music has agreed to make its library of music videos available to YouTube, marking the first time that an established record company has agreed to make its content library available to the user-generated media company. Under the agreement, YouTube users will have full access to videos from Warner artists. They will also be permitted to incorporate material from those videos into their own clips, which are then uploaded to YouTube. Warner and YouTube will share advertising revenue sold in connection with the video content.' This is in contrast to how Universal is handling the situation."
[+] Your Rights Online: Viacom Sues Google Over YouTube for $1 Billion 508 comments
Snowgen writes "Viacom has filed a $1,000,000,000.00 lawsuit for 'massive intentional copyright infringement' against Google over YouTube video clips. '"YouTube's strategy has been to avoid taking proactive steps to curtail the infringement on its site," Viacom said in a statement. "Their business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws.'"
[+] Your Rights Online: New Head of EMI Says 'Embrace Digital Music or Die' 176 comments
no0b writes "Guy Hands is the new head of EMI, Britain's largest music publisher. Hands has come out publicly with a statement warning the industry against something music listeners have probably understood for some time. In the words of the Telegraph article, 'the industry will not survive if it continues to rely on CD sales alone.' More from the piece: 'With both new and established acts now capable of making money without the backing of a big company, McGee says record labels are being left out of the loop. He scoffs at their efforts to make up lost ground by developing into "multimedia entertainment companies that can manage bands and share in live income". But try they must. Revenues from record sales in Britain have dropped by more than £130m since 2004. The true cost to the industry could be far greater. TNS, the market researcher, looked at the spending habits of file-sharers between 2003 and 2005 and estimated a £1bn loss to the country in retail spend.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Now, maybe (Score:5, Funny)

    by Travoltus (110240) on Thursday May 31, @10:56PM (#19347603)
    (Last Journal: Saturday April 01 2006, @09:51PM)
    EMI's approach to copyright will be based more on Terra Firma than from planet Obsolete?
  • slowing building?? (Score:3, Funny)

    by pembo13 (770295) on Thursday May 31, @10:56PM (#19347609)
    (http://www.pembo13.com/)
    Even I noticed that one.
  • Good week for YouTube (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Tibor the Hun (143056) on Thursday May 31, @10:58PM (#19347625)
    Apple is also starting to integrate it into AppleTV. (?TV)
    ref [apple.com]
    I wonder if it has anything to do with their recent commitment to strip DRM off iTunes. Maybe they're realizing that open-ness is good for business?

  • Bullying the new kid? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by aussie_a (778472) on Thursday May 31, @11:04PM (#19347675)
    (Last Journal: Friday February 11 2005, @04:09AM)
    Sorry, but when you're owned by Google you don't get to try to pass yourself off as the "small kid that bullies pick on." Youtube, now with Google's backing, is old hat, with many more newer kids coming onto the block.
    • Re:Bullying the new kid? by timmarhy (Score:2) Thursday May 31, @11:36PM
      • Re:Bullying the new kid? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by aussie_a (778472) on Thursday May 31, @11:45PM (#19347901)
        (Last Journal: Friday February 11 2005, @04:09AM)
        Considering Google has been going head to head against big companies for a while now, no, they're not jr burgers. After all, Microsoft is new compared with some really old companies, so should we call their latest endeavour "the small kid that bullies pick on"? Of course not, that would be silly. Just as its silly to say it about Google.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Bullying the new kid? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by rtb61 (674572) on Friday June 01, @12:39AM (#19348161)
        (http://www.on.net/)
        Did you even RTFA, and see how much they paid for EMI and then compared that to the market value of google. Seriously the googlites need to give up on pity the poor little google, it is has log since run out of it's use by date, privacy invasive, marketdroid plus, viral marketing champions comes more to mind now.

        Viacom most probably doesn't want to agree with google because it wants to compete with google in the long run, not only in video distribution but likely in search as well as a web destination portal.

        As for the EMI deal that could simply be a way for major shareholders to indirectly sell off the company with out the appearance of fire sale prices from insiders and major shareholders selling off all their stock (crashing to earth comes to mind).

        Independently published music as well as a growing preference for live music (people are overdosing on downloaded digital and are seeking more opportunities for live interaction) are slowly but surely killing the old publishing beasts. Those with the skills will shift their focus and grow 'Viacom' those with out will get swallowed up along the way.

        Besides video is driven by links from other web sites and not by the site itself, unless the site can offer unique content, not just countless, mindless, juvenile variations upon a theme (I would include most music videos in that category).

        Besides everybody knows the new kid on the block will be an invisible search engine, that offers it services to other media outlets to provide them with full featured web search, caching and neutral news search etc. with only a portion of the costs, and then shares the resulting marketing revenue (initial target market, mid sized news outlets), i.e. not one google competitor but thousands, oddly enough likely to be staffed with under paid, disgruntled, ex google coders ;).

        [ Parent ]
  • DRM Free EMI on iTunes and Now this (Score:3, Interesting)

    by imemyself (757318) on Thursday May 31, @11:04PM (#19347681)
    It seems like EMI is, or is atleast trying to be, one of the least anti-technology major record labels. Hopefully these sort of things will start a trend, or at least encourage people to demand that the others in the entertainment industry get with it already and stop fighting every new technology that comes around.
  • I hate to ask (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RobertM1968 (951074) on Thursday May 31, @11:08PM (#19347705)
    (http://www.geocodeengine.com/)

    But how does this affect EMI's relationship with Sony and the RIAA, and how would this affect (possible) actions from the RIAA?

    Not trying to troll or start a war, just curious as I cant find anything that discusses this aspect anywhere online.

  • That's hardly fair (Score:1, Troll)

    by TodMinuit (1026042) <todminuit@noSPaM.gmail.com> on Friday June 01, @12:23AM (#19348093)

    YouTube is slowing building a cadre of friends on the playground while Viacom continues to bully the new kid.
    That's hardly a fare statement. It's more like you either do business with YouTube or... nothing. They're untouchable, even though they are violating copyright law on such a large scale.
  • $2.4bn? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MassiveForces (991813) on Friday June 01, @12:28AM (#19348113)
    Considering they paid up nearly as much for Youtube, Google might consider buying a record label to have a seat at the RIAA table. Think of the do no evil they could do... "I propose our business model should follow a stick-it-on-youtube drm free approach, all in favour say I" Google EMI "I" Google BMG "I" Google Virgin "I" Google...
    • Re:$2.4bn? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Friday June 01, @02:23AM
  • by smegged (1067080) on Friday June 01, @12:43AM (#19348183)
    Google has too much invested in Youtube to allow any corporate action to kill it. Until Viacom realise this they are on the losing side.

    EMI appear to be begrudgingly accepting that their antiquated business models need some reform. It is only a matter of time before the other labels follow suit.
  • Macbidouille (French) [macbidouille.com] is mentioning that Youtube is encoding new content to H264 and will re-encode all the old content as well later. Therefore Youtube is doing the work for Apple.
  • if you can't beat em, join em ;)
  • by simong (32944) on Friday June 01, @03:13AM (#19348847)
    (http://www.conversal.co.uk/)
    Irrespective of the arguments around property and payment for music, 90% of music videos are promotional items for the songs that they are selling and such the record labels should be promoting exposure wherever they can. Now that MTV has almost stopped showing videos altogether they should be looking for other routes of exposure. I'm certainly not going to pay £2 to see an advert on my phone.
  • Great business decision... for once. (Score:3, Informative)

    by NickCatal (865805) on Friday June 01, @05:36AM (#19349525)
    (http://www.nickcatalano.com/)
    I've personally found quite a few songs on Youtube that I really liked and went and bought them on iTunes for $0.99 .

    What a lot of people don't realize is that the quality on these videos suck, and there is currently no "easy" way to rip the audio off of these things. YouTube is in Mono for christ's sake! Even the "Higher Quality" video sites like Revver don't have all that great audio. So I don't see this cutting into the music industry's bottom line. Hell, if the users started saying what music they used in their videos it could sell a ton of music, especially from smaller bands.

    My point is this. You could upload the entire Kelly Clarkson CD into individual Youtube videos with just a blank picture of Kelly Clarkson and I seriously doubt it would hurt sales (those videos don't get a ton of views anyways unless it is an unreleased/leaked copy... which if that happened would also probably sell a ton of records)
  • which includes YouTube vids you can put on your Profile (and queue up to 5 videos or songs you or your friends can play).
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.