What is Digg?56 Comments
- Atario, on 12/24/2008, -1/+36The idiots at the labels seem to have forgotten that "music videos" were originally called "*promotional* music videos". They were intended to stir up interest in the music, not be a revenue stream on their own. Guess they don't need publicity anymore, huh?
Stupid greed still rules the day for RIAA members, film at eleven. - WibWobble, on 02/02/2009, -0/+26***** THE RIAA!
- michaelpinto, on 12/23/2008, -1/+22There's already pretty darn good site for music videos if the labels would wake up: http://pitchfork.tv
- maz2331, on 12/24/2008, -1/+21Google should turn the tables on these greedy bastards and whip them senseless with the GoogleDick.
Seriously, it's time for a visit by Luca Brassi....
Okay, not literally. But what Google can do is declare a real war against the *AA companies that have been the bane of much legal angst for them. First, pull them completely out of the search engine. Next, any page that directly links to them goes out too. Then, actively search and destroy any YouTube video posts that are from these companies, or could be "infringing" in any way. And put in their place a "Removed due to copyright - email $whoever@$bigmedia.com there instead (with a "click here to send message..." button, of course).
Remove them and the next tier of shills down from Google's "search space" (should I spell that SearchSpace?) and see how quickly they knock off the *****.
Hey, Google - it's war. Grow a pair already and threaten them with nuclear armageddon, the online version. - diggafrica, on 12/24/2008, -0/+20I think Warner has lost the plot.. the aim of the music videos is to promote their artist. They should be thankful that popular mediums such as YouTube is available for them free to exploit its vast marketing potential. They should pay youtube!, not the other way around. It cost youtube anytime people watch those videos too.
- SilverRocket, on 12/24/2008, -1/+19Hmmm, they should make a television channel where you can see HD music videos 24/hrs a day. Maybe have some hours where they mix up the genres. That would be a hit. They should call it MTV.
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -1/+11http://i41.tinypic.com/2dj5oi.jpg
made it for the lulz - inactive, on 12/24/2008, -1/+11Record Labels arent needed. Start your own website and sell your music... Record labels in this day and age really are just the middle men.. Cut em out...
- THETEH, on 12/24/2008, -0/+10This is a really good point. There are so many cool bands that I discover by wandering around youtube and watching music videos. If I like a band enough, I buy their stuff. It's profitable for Warner group to have their music on Youtube. They're being completely stupid.
- Depthfunction, on 12/24/2008, -0/+9Once again, the record labels have it backwards: they should be paying YouTube for the privilege of allowing music videos to be seen. Music videos are commercials for the song/album/artist, nothing more. It's like companies demanding the NFL pay them a million dollars each to air a commercial during the Super Bowl. It's completely backwards and just another example of the RIAA's boundless arrogance.
- mark925, on 12/24/2008, -0/+8It's almost as if the music industry is purposely trying to self-destruct themselves. If they were smart, they'd use YouTube as a promotional vehicle for their artists.
- nostraboris, on 12/24/2008, -1/+7Who watches music videos? I go to youtube to watch Hitler call customer service http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_7p-Lh7uEg
- conversekid, on 12/24/2008, -0/+5MTV IS DEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!
- Lunarsight, on 12/24/2008, -0/+5While I wouldn't go so far to say that record labels aren't needed, IMHO the role they fill is changing.
I see record labels offering specialty services to the artist - the sort of thing that wouldn't be time-efficient for the artists to handle on their own. I don't see them owning the artists body and soul anymore. Musicians are starting to wise up to the contractual screwjob the main record labels wants them to sign. - dieboldcracy, on 12/24/2008, -0/+4exactly. great point diggafrica. This backwards thinking is partly what got them into the trouble they're in now to begin with.
In the absence of free promotion we will have videos sold to us? and who's going to be buying......crickets........... - Lunarsight, on 12/24/2008, -0/+4An artist should really think before they sign a 360 deal. You really have to compare what the record labels have to offer nowadays relative to what they're asking for.
IMHO, the future of record labels is for distribution and promotions. Is this worth a percentage of every source of revenue the artist makes? Perhaps in some cases, but I'd watch the exact percentage carefully and/or place limitations upon it. (You could steal a page out of health insurance and put a maximum cap and/or time limit on it.)
Realistically? In this day and age, even the promotion piece can be handled by the artist himself - you see plenty of instances of this online. - freakFlag, on 12/24/2008, -0/+4Perhaps on MTV2 they could play shows because MTV should always Music Television ... why the ***** didn't you do that you rotten bastards!!! Now I'm stuck, NOT WITH MUSIC VIDEOS, but ***** teenies making difficult decisions like the life choice of a pink or white Ferrari on their 16th ***** birthday. ***** for brains I say, two words, MTV AMP, two words HEADBANGERS BALL, two words AEON FLUX, two words THE MAXX, two words THE HEAD, etc.
A BIG ***** YOU TO 1997, THE BEGINNING OF END FOR MUSIC TELEVISION. - joegibes, on 12/24/2008, -0/+3Palladia is an awesome 1080i concert channel (owned by VH1, I believe)... Perhaps VH1 should branch out to music videos. Maybe call it Music Television.
- Olfster, on 12/24/2008, -0/+3I say this is a good thing. Less promotion of their catalog = less sales = increased velocity to the point of failure for the record company. I wonder if this can be tracked via iTunes purchases? I know people that have made purchases of albums and songs they use to own because they found the video on YouTube.
- maz2331, on 12/24/2008, -0/+3A percentage, maybe. The lion's share? No way in hell.
And anyone who ever signs over copyright for their own work is an idiot. - pigfister, on 12/24/2008, -0/+3SCUM;
RIAA, CRIA, SOUNDEXCHANGE, BPI, IFPI, Ect:
# Sony BMG Music Entertainment
# Warner Music Group
# Universal Music Group
# EMI
MPAA, MPA:
# Sony Pictures
# Warner Bros. (Time Warner)
# Universal Studios (NBC Universal)
# The Walt Disney Company
# 20th Century Fox (News Corporation)
# Paramount Pictures Viacom—(DreamWorks owners since February 2006) - dtfinch, on 12/24/2008, -0/+3Warner will continue to try and sell music, but I won't know any of it exists.
- Olfster, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2LOL, yea give them what they want.
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2I will second that notion. Agreed, Nuke the bastards..
- bubba9999, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2Depthfunction is right. The labels are flirting with danger by splintering to the extent that each label will end up having their own web presence for their product.
That's fine is you're looking for a specific artist ("Oh, I want to watch Kanye, so I have to go to Def Jam's site"), but the problem is that you won't stumble across a video from some other artist that you never heard of. This will kill off new talent.
Monolithism is definitely a bad idea for an industry that's already suffering from the effects of bad decisions they've made for the last 10 years. As it is currently, most people end up going to Youtube to see music videos. The labels are benefiting from this, but they're trying to squeeze a little extra juice out of it to make up for losses stemming from the their other monkey business. - connieLingus, on 12/24/2008, -1/+3this ***** is as old as time itself....the wealthy have been patronizing and subsidizing artists since Grecian times. Who do you think supported Michaelanglo during his 15 year Sistine Chapel gig? The Church. Mozart? wealthy German kings and princes.
the modern corporation is the feudal lords and fiefdoms of our times...why does everyone keep acting so surprised as we see artists revert back to a funding method that worked for 2500 years? - Jessie84, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2Warner should be happy with the promotion through YouTube.. but in order not to deal with licensing fees and all that, and most of all get new sounds, I use music from Tribe of Noise for my YouTube videos. But not only that, I also download this music ( under Creative Commons by Share A Like = Free and legal! ) for my iPod.. worth checking out @ www.tribeofnoise.com
- Xodius, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2Ding Ding! I've been saying that one for years.
These old ***** are clamoring on to anything they can right now. 6 years I worked in that business before I left. They can all choke on their own vomit.
They don't realize that not only are they in the entertainment business, but they are also in the technology business now. - inactive, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1lol
- Lunarsight, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1Mark - I think you're right.
Although - the record labels don't need to do all the self-destructive work themselves. There are plenty of music fans who would gladly assist them with their own demise, free of charge. - dieboldcracy, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1wow, did I really just watch that?
- mclewell, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1Downfall is a really good movie
- SadMartigan, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1I am glad you posted that link. I found some stuff on there that I really didn't realize I was missing out on!
That Lilly Allen video about the The Fear is actually making me stop and listen. Wow. - cbmilne33, on 12/24/2008, -1/+2I must point out to all concerned that one factor in this is that of the rivalry between Google's YouTube and the newly resurrected AOL Time Warner which is now going to use the Warner Music fan bases to drive internet traffic to both its AOL Video and Bebo sites which could also include posting of ones favourite AOL Videos to both a persons AOL Video user accounts and the video boxes on that same persons Bebo accounts.Just another point of view regards leveraging the power of the internet.
- Barackalypse, on 12/24/2008, -1/+2A small correction is in order, "The removal of Warner Music Group's OFFICIAL videos from YouTube...". Youtube continues to have plenty of music videos from Warner's "artists". The Internet views removal of content as damage and repopulates it.
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1they ought to be otherwise they will finish
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1Just registered m.tv m.tv.com m.tv.net mtv.com. mtv.net
- bjornski, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1No kidding. I've got a DJ buddy, and we play "YouTube tag" all the time.
I guess we won't be listening to any Warner music any time soon. - swazo, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1paid product placement does not bother me at all for the most part. especially coogi bikini girls.
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -0/+1Well there is a business model. Selling artists instead of the product as a " faceless unit". The question is, how do you buy the radio stations, pump out 100,000 copies then buy them all back, pump up the price since they are now #1 this week and sell the lot at $30 instead of $12?
- Jessie84, on 12/24/2008, -0/+0And what does that have to do with YouTube and Warner? Lol..
- inactive, on 12/24/2008, -1/+1I don't even have to read the comments to know how pathetic they will be. But answer me this...Why should they sell the rights for whatever GOOGLE says is fair?
- inactive, on 04/05/2009, -0/+0Yo music http://www.yomuzik.net
- okcoolok1234, on 12/24/2008, -1/+1They can't take away the Video Christmas Card on YouTube!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuJ3xVUIJKA - exspasticcomics, on 12/24/2008, -1/+1isn't dreamworks back by foreign investors now? thought they pulled out of the paramount deal.
- jamey1974, on 01/02/2009, -0/+0It's free promotion.Not everyone is a computer whiz.No one steals the songs.No one bothers.Most of the songs stink.But an artist is exposed and this stirs up interest in sales,merchandise,concerts.Now the labels are gonna screw the artists more.There will probably be no royalties and they'll demand like 75 percent of income from all sources which includes,concerts,merchandise,even acting in movies.I just say do it yourself.The companies will be like loan sharks.All of us should just do it ourselves.Everything's on-line based anyway.
- dieboldcracy, on 12/24/2008, -2/+1you're not stuck, just turn it off
- bluerazor413, on 12/24/2008, -6/+4buried for web neutrality
-
Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 