Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


The day the music died on YouTube

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 10 March 2009
MUSIC videos began to vanish from the YouTube website last night after its owner, Google, became embroiled in a row over licensing.
The internet search engine is involved in a dispute with the Performing Rights Society for Music (PRS), which licenses and collects royalties on behalf of recording artists and copyright holders.

The PRS said Google wants to pay "significantly less than at present to the writers of the music". Google said the deal it had been offered would result in it losing money every time a video was played.

As a result of the deadlock, Google began to block UK viewers from watching "premium music videos" – those placed on the site by record companies – at 6pm last night. The company said it will take several days until all professional music videos are covered by the restriction.

YouTube – which was bought for $1.65 billion (£1.2 billion) in 2006 – is the world's most popular video streaming site, but is under pressure by its parent to generate more revenue.

Google described the move as a "painful decision", which it knew would cause "significant disappointment" among fans, but said that "prohibitive licensing fees" were an obstacle in the negotiations.

A spokesman said: "We value the creativity of musicians and songwriters and have worked hard with rights-holders to generate significant online revenue for them and to respect copyright.

"But PRS is now asking us to pay many, many times more for our licence than before. The costs are simply prohibitive for us – under PRS's proposed terms we would lose significant amounts of money with every playback.

"In addition, PRS is unwilling to tell us what songs are included in the licence they can provide so that we can identify those works on YouTube – that's like asking a consumer to buy a CD without knowing what musicians are on it."

PRS for Music said it was shocked by Google's "drastic action", which it said would "punish" music lovers and songwriters.

"Google has told us they are taking this step because they wish to pay significantly less than at present to the writers of the music on which their service relies, despite the massive increase in YouTube viewing.

"This action has been taken without any consultation with PRS for Music and in the middle of negotiations between the two parties.

"PRS for Music has not requested Google to do this and urges them to reconsider their decision as a matter of urgency."

While negotiations continue, Google said it would be working "to create more ways to compensate musicians and other rights-holders on YouTube". It recently introduced an option for users to pay to download songs.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 09 March 2009 11:43 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: YouTube
 
1

eDUCATIon,

10/03/2009 00:23:39
I think its more of a case of them both needing each other, but at what price?
2

Angoos,

Baku, Azerbaijan 10/03/2009 06:34:40
I reckon it's more a case of the PRS trying to screw as much money as possible, from any source, to make up for the shortfall in royalties that artists receive these days due to the demise of the music industry as a whole.

The music industry is falling apart due to the "one hit wonder" mentality they have had for the past 20 years or so. They spend very little on A&R, no money on developing artists, but shedloads on promoting talentless "pretty boys" and "pretty girl" bands to cater for under 16's who are the only people buying CD singles these days. They have to have INSTANT success or are dropped like a hot brick.

Personally I'd rather go to a bar and watch a live band as the music on offer in local venues throughout Scotland is a hell of a lot better than the drivel that is promoted on radio and TV by the record companies !
3

eric,

10/03/2009 07:41:49
3, I agree,live music is what its all about,Not these awful pre-packed boil n the bag supermaket mime acts like madge,and xfactor tripe.
4

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

10/03/2009 08:00:22
Hard to imagine youtube without the music videos.
Hard to imagine it surviving on 'user generated content' alone that's for sure!
5

Boy Wonder,

10/03/2009 09:16:51
The PRS are singularly responsible for the demise of recorded music being played anywhere these days ... unless it's muzak ... which is usualy execrable and unlistenable to!

Kids walk around with music blaring from their headphones. Will they be chased up next for allowing the public to hear what's playing on their iPod/MP3 players???

The PRS was always a step too far in copyright law!
6

Boy Wonder,

10/03/2009 09:17:56
PS
Don't give in to them. Google. My kids and nephew and their mates are right behind you!!!
7

Old Cartha Boy,

10/03/2009 10:16:07
Artists represented by PRS undoubtedly benefit from exposure on Youtube - I've certainly bought CDs on the strength of stuff seen on YT. PRS - you've got it wrong again!
8

BillyC,

Paisley 10/03/2009 10:16:09
How stupid of the PRS as they were getting free advertising for the bands and singers involved. How many sales do they gain from people watching these videos. Some artists appreciate the promotion side of Youtube, Jean Michel Jarre for example, who uploads stuff to this site himself. How come it is okay for the likes of him as an artist and the stupid PRS are arguing the opposite - plonkers!
9

Silence of the Yams,

10/03/2009 10:49:12
More greed. Bonio and his mates off youtube is a blessing that I wish could be replicated elsewhere!
10

I don't buy the Evening News,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 12:53:11
Surely YouTube provides free advertising for artists, which in turn leads to more royalties for songwriters?
11

bus user,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 22:45:40
So, it's back to illegal downloads, or, more interestingly, legal content from artist websites. Ho Hum.
Nice own goal by the music industry. Google is a business and it's acting like one, so learn to negotiate. Meanwhile I'll go elsewhere for video content [see above].
Home taping didn't kill music; neither will this.
12

Big Carbon Footprint,

Edinburgh 11/03/2009 10:09:14
Yip I would certainly expect 'illegal' downloads to go up now.
Since we have to admit much of the music that comes out now is utter tripe. After playing these latest tracks a few times you no longer wish them, look at many popular singers nowadays they have an album with a few ok songs then the rest is filled with space fillers!
Greedy companies have again shot themselves in the foot!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.