Copyright infringement
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=109278
Printed Date: January 14 2025 at 21:27
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Copyright infringement
Posted By: Kingsnake
Subject: Copyright infringement
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 03:52
|
You know, what bothers me the most? On many forums (but also social media platforms) people post their favorite songs by their favorite artists. But most of the time, the songs are not from official channels. Just (illegally) uploaded songs, with an albumcover as image. Why is that? Why not refer to songs, via official channels (like spotify or iTunes) so the artists can make a buck out of it? It makes me sad, that even the fans don't care if their favorite bands don't make money. |
Replies:
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 04:08
| Spotify pays artists practically nothing. |
Posted By: Meltdowner
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 04:15
| I've seen many artists who share illegally uploaded songs on Youtube to promote their work. |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 04:30
|
It's something that bothers me. That doesn't mean that I know what's really going on. I know for a fact, that Spotify pays nothing (i've earned 16 cents with my music the last year). But how can you tell that an uploaded song is by the Original artist, if the channel doesn't directly belong to the artist?
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 04:40
|
The reason is probably due to the difficulty of embedding individual iTunes and Spotify (or Bandcamp and SoundCloud) tracks into forum and social media posts. It's not that fans won't do it, it's that they can't. Here at PA we lean on the "fair use" clause of copyrighted material, which basically means it is legal to link copyrighted material for transformative purposes, such as comment or criticism. This is why the Admins will remove any post that links to an entire album or concert performance as this does not constitute "fair use". ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 04:46
That's a nice gesture. Thanks for the info. It won't bother me much, knowing this. Maybe I can see it like this: a person clicks a YouTube film, watches it, falls in love, and buys the album.
But i've seen posts of full albums on forums. Can't remember if that was on this site. But if I see it, I can report the post? |
Dean wrote:Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 05:01
|
Certainly. ------------- What? |
Posted By: phonewind
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 05:17
|
I think that it was Bob Fripp who started it. And then he decided that he was paying his lawyers too much to get every King Crimson video removed from Youtoube. I think that I own every freaking King Crimson recording ever made including some bootlegs that Bob doesn't even know about. |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 05:21
|
Yeah, and Metallica killed napster. But that's besides the point. Let's say I release a single via Bandcamp. It'll cost you 1 dollar. And you upload it on YouTube, so you can make money with advertisements. Then I made a total of 1 dollar and you'd make (let's assume it's a good song) dozens of dollars. How is that fair? And why do people support that? |
Posted By: twseel
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 05:53
|
Well in a lot of these cases the Bandcamp artist can easily get the video demonetized through copyright without having to get the video removed ------------- 
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:01
|
As far as I know there's no way to make money from listens on Bandcamp,
and people who just want to listen to the song once aren't going to pay
anything for a download anyway. Also, there's nothing stopping the artist (or their record company) from uploading their songs on Youtube themselves and supposedly making dozens of dollars from ads. |
Posted By: phonewind
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:06
| Of all people I had the opportunity to talk with Alanis Morrisette in a bar. She said to me she doesn't care if her music is posted on social media. She said that it is good for artists because their work gets more exposure and they make more money. Is Alanis prog? |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:09
|
Alanis sure is prog. :) Good discussion. I had a copyright infringement of my own. My label (CDBaby) claimed a song I uploaded my own. I had to prove it was actually me, who uploaded the song. So in this case, I thought it was great CDBaby actually came up for my rights. |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:10
You can make money from the downloads. Streaming sure is free, indeed.
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:16
And I've never heard of people downloading music from Youtube (possible, but not worth the trouble), so the two aren't really comparable. |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:24
|
That's where you are wrong. Millions of people download via YouTube. There are hundreds of websites and software that translate YouTube-movies into mp3 or wav etc. But I guess my point wasn't really clear. I agreed with you, so I don't get why your last post. I'm not comparing bandcamp and YouTube. If an imposter would upload to bandcamp and make money, that would be a problem (like on YouTube). I think that happens a lot. With YouTube it's mosty entire albums or live-dvd's wich have thousands of views, and the copyright don't belong to the uploader. Most of the time the full albums are from bands that long have gone, and recordlabels that long have gone.
|
Posted By: zravkapt
Date Posted: November 02 2016 at 06:40
Absolutely I don't think most musicians care these days. If they did they would go the Prince route; before he died you could not stream or download any of his music. Outside of Tidal ,if you wanted to hear Prince's music you had to buy a CD. ------------- Magma America Great Make Again |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 03 2016 at 03:20
Okay, fair point. Here's a fun fact - to date more musicians have posted replies in this thread than non musicians. Considering that (like me) you have "officially" uploaded a track to Bandcamp and to YouTube.... how much money do you really make from each in relative terms? (not actual revenue perhaps but equivalent effective earnings based upon number of YouTube views per year multiplied by a typical YouTube CPM rate). Do you make (the equivalent of) dozens of dollars more from YouTube than Bandcamp? I suspect not. To earn a dollar from YouTube Ad revenue a person needs to exceed several thousand views on a regular basis. If you earn $1 from Bandcamp (which you can't actually do if your download price is $1, to earn $1 per download the download price has to be $1.18) then that "illegal" someone needs to earn $12 from pirating your track to YouTube, which means they'll have to exceed tens of thousands of views of your track. Similarly if you sell ten downloads then they'll have to achieve hundreds of thousands of views.
I recon that the truth is the other way around - if you earn $12 from Bandcamp someone pirating your stuff on YouTube will think themselves incredibly fortunate if they manage to earn $1 from your track. Now, I'm going to guess that unless you are really a secretly successful Bandcamp artist then you are not making a vast amount of money there either. The maths of Bandcamp [the total amount of cash paid to artists ÷ total number of tracks available] simply does not allow every Bandcamp artist to be recouping their production costs, let alone making a profit.
The problem is, all Bandcamp artists are very cagey about revealing how much they really earn (because that kind of thing is "none of your business" - personal finance is as the name suggests - personal). This isn't a uniquely Bandcamp thing, this is true for most artists using most sales mediums, no one is willing to own-up to either making shed-loads of money or none at all because it's bad for business... and of course everyone thinks their big break is just around the corner. No one has more optimism than an delusional aspiring artist - after all if Amanda Palmer can make $15K in 3 minutes off Bandcamp then we all can, right? ... Likewise Bandcamp themselves (being a privately owned business) do not reveal any financial data either, in fact they are one of the most secretive companies going when it comes to releasing any kind of stats - they simply say "Fans have paid artists $181 million using Bandcamp, and $4.7 million in the last 30 days alone" like that means something ...
Here is a typical "Bandcamp" artist being open and honest about their earnings: " http://medium.com/@gloom303/a-year-ago-i-released-an-ep-on-spotify-itunes-and-bandcamp-this-is-what-i-l-earned-872925797930#.my46bvy00%20" rel="nofollow - A year ago I released an EP on Spotify, iTunes and Bandcamp. This is what I (L)Earned ."
In 10 months he earned $372 across all sales platforms. Methinks he's not even begun to cover his costs yet, nor will he ever. And that's perfectly fine, but looking at his streaming revenue ($14.63) I doubt he is that concerned about anyone making a fraction of that from his music on YouTube ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bb66zfWB1Ts&list=RDBb66zfWB1Ts#t=215" rel="nofollow - 1,357 views ). ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 03 2016 at 03:27
|
^ That was a very interesting read. You should write a book about the matter. Because many (musicians and non-musicians) are in the dark about all this. Truth be told: I made 5 dollar with Bandcamp, and non with YouTube. Also I made 32 cents in the last year via Spotify, ITunes, Amazon, etc. To get it my music on these channels cost me 30 dollars.
So I'm losing money instead of making money. But to be fair: it's worth it. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: November 03 2016 at 04:04
Before I started making music for myself I was a band manager for six years so quickly learn the ins and outs of the financial side of the music industry the hard way. Also in that time I have paid very close attention to the "internet" side of this because I have been using it right from the very beginning before broadband was even a thing.
At the moment I can't give my stuff away so don't even try to sell it. Over the past 5 years there have been 1,300 free downloads of my albums ... and that's whole albums not individual tracks - I'm not interested in people who only want to download one track, just as I'm not interested in streaming or YouTube views. I have three physical albums (and two paperback novels) available on Amazon and I have not sold a single copy of any of them. So even if (wide-eyed and optimistically) 10% of those 1,300 downloads were sales the $11/month revenue it would have grossed isn't worth the nausea of collecting it.
Exactly. I'm chuffed to bits that people have downloaded my music, more so if they actually like it of course, but you can't have everything in life.  ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: November 03 2016 at 06:40
Let's just assume people like what we do. All three and half of them  |