INT: MEGA MEDIA COMPANY’S BOARDROOM NOT UNLIKE UMG‘s. Seated around the table are 5 senior company executives and a lawyer.
Exec 1: (who sorta resembles Doug Morris): So what is this Utube I keep hearing about?
Exec 2: Err, it’s pronounced YouTube Sir.
Exec 1: Okay, YouTube then. Still doesn’t tell me what it is.
Exec 3: Well Sir, it is a hyper-textual repository for interactive, self-motivated, visual, multi-media social networking.
Exec 1:?
Exec 4: A website for sharing videos Sir.
Exec 1: And how does that affect us?
Exec 3: Well Sir, it appears that any individual may upload video content be it video-blogging, home movies or home made music videos? It is very popular at the moment.
Exec 1: Music videos, eh? Whaddya mean by home made?
Exec 3: Well people can use their PCs to create their own video clip for popular songs.
Exec 1: You mean not that ones we provide?
Exec 3: That’s right.
Exec 2: Sort of like free promotion Sir. People check out the video and if they like the song there is a good chance they will check out the artist.
Exec 1: So how do we tap into it?
Exec 5: I have an idea Sir. We could start negotiations with the owners of YouTube regarding use of our content. Work out some sort of deal and use YouTube for promotional purposes say, viral marketing?
Exec 1: Hmm. Interesting idea but something is not quite right. How have we traditionally dealt with start up Interwebs companies?
Exec 2:Sued the pants off them.
Exec 1: Good idea. So how about we start negotiations with YouTube and when we can’t have things our way, we sue em!
Choruses of âGood idea Sir, Well done. What a unique strategy. What business visionâ? etc
Exec 5: But how much do we sue them for? We can’t exactly quantify these sort of losses.
Lawyer: How does âtens of millions of dollarsâ? sound?
Exec 1: Perfect.
It would be hilarious… if these cretins weren’t so powerful and successful at getting their own way at the expense of the rest of us.
Remember, the same lobbyists for the same halfwit content industries have got Canberra drafting up huge fines to punish consumers who modify their equipment to circumvent “technical protection measures” like region-coding in their devices.
It’s the same idiot industries who screw over your CDs so they won’t work on your computer. Or DRM-cripple the mp3s you buy so that you can’t play them on your new mp3 player. And punish their legitimate consumers every time they buy a DVD or pay to see a movie, by making them sit through unskippable anti-piracy ads – which they WOULDN’T have to watch if they’d pirated the damn things.
These are industries based on the principle of WE OWN EVERYTHING WE TOUCH. They are profoundly stupid and short-sighted; but cunning and possessing huge reserves of lobbying cash with which to get their way.
Hence all the nasty anti-consumer effects of the “Free Trade” Agreement our deluded government signed us up for.
The whole thing just thoroughly depresses me.
A few companies (Warner Bros, NBC for example) have approached and are working with YouTube in regards to content. NBC at first object to a SNL skit being hosted at YouTube. They then realized the potential of YouTube so jumped on board.
Universal’s actions are tied into stalled talks with YouTube. They also have Myspace in their sights as well.
And it is a short-sighted strategy as you mention. Litigating against your customers is not a good long term business strategy. The companies that will do well are those (and it is growing) who engage with the Internet not try and stomp it down.
Another thing is that the videos are in mono and can’t be (well they can if you try abit but besides the point) downloaded.
Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus….
The truth is that all this desperate legal activity by copyright owning corporations is the last throw of the dice as they realise that new technology has made them increasingly irrelevant. I am a musician myself, and am currently working on doing a CD of 5-6 original songs so that I can sell it out of the guitar case when I go busking or play a solo gig. I long ago realised that I would get nothing from a record company, except the chance to sell my independence so that cocaine snorting record company suits could make a few dollars off my ass without doing anything to justify their miserable existence. The only thing that record company and movie studios wangt to own is the creative idea, and that is only because they are able to buy enough stuff to be able to pick the ‘good stuff’, promote the shit out of it, dominate the market, and thus make money when it goes gold and they can sell back catalogue. But do the maths. If I make 1000 CDs at a cost of $1.75 each (cheap recording studio and CD production), and sell them for $10 each, then I make a profit overall of $$8,250, not taking into account any costs in terms of how long it takes me, that sort of thing. If I sign with a record company, not only will they insist on creative control – which means they will want me to spend $20K minimum recording, plus the cost of video clips for Rage – but those funds they give me to record with will have to be paid back out of royalties – something which is very very very unlikely to happen. Like if I get a 10% royalty on a $25 retail CD, then I get $2.50 for each one sold. So I have to sell 8,000 CDs before I even get out of debt to the company. So even if I wind up selling 5,000 copies of a professionally recorded and produced CD that retail at $25 each – which is extremely good – because I have to pay back all the costs of recording, I wind up in debt. It is kind of like me being Stanley Kubrick, and having to pay the studio for the opportunity to make a movie and make the studio a whole lotta of money. Why would anyone bother? Unless they desperately want to be some kind of mass market superstar. Anyway, there is a whole lot more more I could say about the economics of the copyright industries, but I will save this for later.
Cheers…
product
music
Speaking of copyright, i bought a pirated copy of Narnia for my kids whilst in Vietnam this year.
Much to the amusement of our kids, the subtitles got lost in translation somewhere resulting in such charming lines as :
“so where shall we get money?”
“we’ll pimp your sister, motherf***er” and,
“what shall i tell mother?”
” Just tell her to ***k off.”
We call it Narnia Uncut. Not too sure what Lewis would make of it though.
SG, it sounds like you got the “hipster cut” without even asking.
I just want to be able to have fair use of content and modify my source code and hardware, without any harm to anyone else. Glad to see this issue get some attention outside of the open source community
Universal’s actions are tied into stalled talks with YouTube. They also have Myspace in their sights as well.
Thought Newscorp bought that a while back.
Here’s Mr Murdoch’s myspace, if anyone’s curious.
Corporations are clearly heaps better at youth culture than youth.
kim, UMG have stated that they believe Myspace is in violation of copyright laws as well. Not sure as it is a great source for new music via the band pages. Indeed it is owned by Newcorp so that would make a nice battle though I don’t think it will ever happen.
Bruce, I think the issue of fair use in relation to copyrighted material has been going on for a number of years now outside the open source community. The DMCA, DRM schemes for example have been well reported and commented upon.
From Slashdot: Warner Opens Video Library to YouTube. A progressive move.
Mick Strummer is a clever musician. There aren’t enough of those around. Good job.
Not to knock Mick (btw do you have an online presence so we can sample your musical wares) but the move to recording and selling your own CDs and cutting out the labels has been going on for a while. A lot of bands realise this is the way to go. But best of luck Mick. Love to hear your stuff.
I’m astounded at the number of great, new bands I encounter outside the usual distribution networks. One of the good things about Myspace and eMusic.