Taylor Swift is taking on YouTube, and it won’t be an easy fight | Music | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/ ... ies-battle

Why should Google pay them? If the vast amount of videos are through/originated in Vevo anyway, wtf are they talking about?

Oh, and if it wasn't for YT these people would be utterly fcuked short of nostalgic Glasto-type appearances. Most of them made a fortune decades ago and haven't had much success since at least the 90's!

The music industry destroyed itself and now these people want another royalty golden goose. One they don't deserve. The entire world has changed, and Google are inadvertently doing you a bloody favour.

The problem is, from what I understand, that Google are generating money on the music videos by encasing them in adverts and then offering the artists a couple of cents on the dollar.

Add to that, the artist has to sign up to get the meagre hand-out, if they want to be able to take down videos. If they don't sign up, then they lose the right to access the DMCA take-down platform, which means that YouTube can continue to show the videos and take 100c on the dollar earned from the adverts.

The artists' choice is basically, sign up and get a pittance, or lose the right to take down illegal content.

Nah. You're under no requirement to use anyone's specific mechanism to do that kind of thing. If an email or lawyer from a lawyer arrives, they're still legally required to implement it in a timely manner. You don't get to define the legal process for yourself.

The problem is, the platform works semi-automatically, using recognition algorithms. It can take the videos down fairly quickly. By the time you've written an email to take one video down, another dozen or so have been uploaded... Whilst it is possible, you are fighting a losing battle and using the DMCA platform is the only way to take down or exploit videos in any practical manner.

But if it's Vevo and the majority of artists are signed up to it in these terms...