Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

savingcountrymusic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 125 posts

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#41

Post by rglullis »

hnlmorg wrote: post #37
rglullis wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hey everyone, I'm Rick Beato. I am tired of dealing with YouTube constantly threatening my livelihood, so now I will be focused on my own channel. I will be posting here as well for whatever they let me, but to get full videos just download the GrayJay app (link in description) and look for my channel (link also in description)." That's all it would take to get a few hundred thousand people to download it, and you'd…

I’m not being defeatist. I’m literally just pointing out the reality of consumer trends. There is oodles of research into this topic. It isn’t something I’ve just made up. It’s why analytics exist to explore website user journeys and then promoting the most important calls to action in prominent places. It’s why physical store fronts put the doors at the front of the shop rather than on the side (side note: a friend…

You are confusing "optimal" with "feasible" and you are ignoring the fact it can be more profitable to serve a niche (people with a minimum of ethical standards) than to be just yet-another participant in the commodity marketplace.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#42

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

bigyabai wrote: post #9
rkachowski wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The music in question would be the music of the artist he's interviewing at the time, the absurdity is that you can interview the creator but not show what they've created.

If the creator gave up their copyright then it's not absurd, it's law. This is why it's important for budding artists to keep their masters.

Good luck with that if you're a new artist looking at a deal. The label will just say "No" and move on.

Artists need exceptional leverage to negotiate a licensing deal instead of a buy out with a reversion option. Most new artists don't have that.

While HN is stuck on its usual obsession with copyright, the reality is the entire ecosystem is bad.

Labels and distributors have the best of all possible worlds. They used to invest in artist development. Now they don't. Most spend very little on promotion, except for household name headliners who are guaranteed earners. Some demand 360 deals where they get a share of all income - sales, plays, touring, and so on.

They're giant corporations run by MBAs whose existence is entirely parasitic.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#43

Post by bonoboTP »

rglullis wrote: post #27
hnlmorg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GP is still correct. People are lazy. If you add even a small complication for people to consume content, then it doesn’t matter how much respect that content creator has, people will just follow someone else instead. Google knows this; which is why they can screw over content creators on their platform.

https://grayjay.app/ solves this quite well.

YouTube already was built on the "distributed" premise. That You can "broadcast yourself" as the slogan says, you use the platform to make your own presence, users can subscribe to you specifically and the platform merely connects the audience and the video makers. No longer are you beholden to the old ways of cable TV producer filters and gatekeepers. You just find and manage your own audience and the platform gets out of the way.

So when grayjay says "Follow Creators, Not Platforms" I'm pretty sure that the minute that regular people on the street know about the existence of "grayjay", they will become essentially also a platform that enshittifies in the same way (cf. https://xkcd.com/927/).

It's a common pattern. Be an aggregator first, then slowly introduce exclusives, and become a competitor that climbed up on the backs of the others. Somewhat similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#44

Post by motoxpro »

rglullis wrote: post #30
hnlmorg wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same problem applies: That’s another site to read. Another app to download. Another product to discover. I nearly didn’t even open the link because I didn’t want to learn something new before I’d had my morning cup of earl grey. Chances are the average consumer wouldn’t bother — assuming they even discover about this to begin with.

"Hey everyone, I'm Rick Beato. I am tired of dealing with YouTube constantly threatening my livelihood, so now I will be focused on my own channel. I will be posting here as well for whatever they let me, but to get full videos just download the GrayJay app (link in description) and look for my channel (link also in description)." That's all it would take to get a few hundred thousand people to download it, and you'd…

You're assuming a ~5% conversion rate and usage/payment in perpetuity. Those are just unrealistic assumptions, based on my experience in this space.

Everything breaks. - Channel makes no money because sponsors don't pay (as much, it's a power law) for 200k subs (being charitable with your 5%. in reality it would be - Guest don't come because the channel is small and they don't get distribution for their projects

- Platform X doesn't pay out as well as YouTube, so you lose more revenue

- The channel can't function because there isn't enough revenue to run the business. Can't hire lawyers when Z Record Label sues you on Platform X.

- Other channels on larger platforms take the space that you filled. The market is not static. Slash starts his own YouTube channel, which has more credibility, and David Gilmour goes on that one instead. See the celebrity podcast/YouTube space for arguments that prominent celebrities don't become creators when the market signals there is money/opportunity available.

- When subscribers churn, there is no one new on the platform to replace them. Churn in this case means they no longer use the app I made them go to, or they no longer subscribe to or pay me. Creator payment churn is MUCH higher than any typical B2B or B2C churn.

Being a creator is like standing up a business on a set of toothpicks. Even if you are Rick Beato (which is why he is so upset)

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#45

Post by stevage »

rsp1984 wrote: post #23

It gets even crazier when compared to other IP law: Engineer makes an invention: Write 30-Page patent application. Multi-year patenting process with USPTO, pay 1000s of $ if DIY, 10x that if using an IP law firm. Multiply by 4x if going international. With luck, patent gets issued 3 years later. It protects you for 25 years, but only if you have deep pockets for an IP lawsuit in case someone does copy you -- and with…

And clothing designer...there is no copyright, suck it up.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#46

Post by rglullis »

motoxpro wrote: post #44
rglullis wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Hey everyone, I'm Rick Beato. I am tired of dealing with YouTube constantly threatening my livelihood, so now I will be focused on my own channel. I will be posting here as well for whatever they let me, but to get full videos just download the GrayJay app (link in description) and look for my channel (link also in description)." That's all it would take to get a few hundred thousand people to download it, and you'd…

You're assuming a ~5% conversion rate and usage/payment in perpetuity. Those are just unrealistic assumptions, based on my experience in this space. Everything breaks. - Channel makes no money because sponsors don't pay (as much, it's a power law) for 200k subs (being charitable with your 5%. in reality it would be - Guest don't come because the channel is small and they don't get distribution for their projects - Pl…

I am not saying to completely drop YT. I am saying (a) to run both and keep promoting the alternative and (b) coordinate with other creators to do the same.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#47

Post by bonoboTP »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #42
bigyabai wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the creator gave up their copyright then it's not absurd, it's law. This is why it's important for budding artists to keep their masters.

Good luck with that if you're a new artist looking at a deal. The label will just say "No" and move on. Artists need exceptional leverage to negotiate a licensing deal instead of a buy out with a reversion option. Most new artists don't have that. While HN is stuck on its usual obsession with copyright, the reality is the entire ecosystem is bad. Labels and distributors have the best of all possible worlds. They used…

Why can't an artist or band just make songs and upload them to the platforms directly? And do live shows. What extra does a label give? As you said, they used to invest in artist development and were indispensable for producing the physical media at scale and distributing it to physical record stores everywhere, including internationally. Today all this is much simpler to manage.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#48

Post by [deleted] »

JdeBP wrote: post #29
rglullis wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Few people are buying anything in this world where streaming is the norm and the labels make money by cutting deals with the distribution platforms. The solution for me, in this specific case, would be for Beato to act against YouTube and take his channel elsewhere. He has enough followers to be able to start his own Peertube server, find a few sponsors and keep going forever.

Given that xe has "a great lawyer", the logical choice for M. Beato is to move to Nebula, if anywhere. That said, xyr lawyer is getting this rejected on fair use grounds again and again. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLHU0ZUbXX8&t=123s The beef is less with YouTube and far more with Universal Music Group. After all, it's not as if YouTube has upheld the copyright claims. The proper outcome is for Universal Music…

[deleted]

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#49

Post by jermaustin1 »

atoav wrote: post #20
Veserv wrote: post #14

The most ridiculous part of music copyrights is that the DMCA explicitly encodes statutory damages of at least 750$ up to 30,000$, and up to 150,000$ for willful infringement per work [1]. Yet musical compositions are subject to compulsory mechanical copyright licenses at a fixed rate of 12.4 cents or 2.38 cents per minute, whichever is higher [2] for music covers [3] (i.e. same song, different singer/band or even sa…

As a former film student I can say from experience that licensing rights can be expensive. And how expensive depends on the usage. E.g. playing a song at a live event is different from using it in television which is different from using it in your youtube video which is different from using it in a film for cinema. Want to play any popular music in your cinema film? The license can easily cost 25.000 € (for film stu…

> E.g. playing a song at a live event is different from using it in television which is different from using it in your youtube video which is different from using it in a film for cinema.

Not a criticism, just an addendum for anyone interested:

In the US, almost every bar/restaurant/venue is an ASCAP licensee, and it is relatively cheap (around $10/year/occupant for all forms of media), so a venue that wants to play live or recorded music, television broadcasts, etc., and seats 100 people would pay about $1000/year.

It's a very good price, and one of the main reasons that at any concert hall or arena, you will hear even huge artists playing covers without having to get them pre-approved.

Re: Rick Beato is right to rant about music copyright strikes

#50

Post by [deleted] »

rglullis wrote: post #27
hnlmorg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GP is still correct. People are lazy. If you add even a small complication for people to consume content, then it doesn’t matter how much respect that content creator has, people will just follow someone else instead. Google knows this; which is why they can screw over content creators on their platform.

https://grayjay.app/ solves this quite well.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN