AnotherWorld - View topic - YouTube vs. WMG - The *Fans* Board - Free Message Board Hosting by FreePowerBoards.com

This is for all of you video-makers or for those who are thinking of making a vid in the future ~

When I realized that the audio portion of my Mitch/Felicia vid was muted by YT, I did some research cuz when I was surfing YT months ago, I was pretty sure that I saw other vids by Bette Midler. Turns out I wasn't mistaken, nor did I do anything wrong other than to get caught in a "licensing spat" between YT and Warner Music Group (WMG). Up until late December 2008, YTubers had Warner's blessing to use their songs/artists as background music.

Here's the article from Cnet ~

Quote:

YouTube users caught in Warner Music spat
by Greg Sandoval

Corey Vidal is no pirate, but he's been branded one as a result of the licensing spat between Warner Music Group and YouTube.

On YouTube, Vidal posted a humorous video tribute to John Williams, the man who scored the soundtracks for such blockbuster films as Indiana Jones, and Star Wars. In his clip he included some of Williams' music. By now, everybody knows that YouTube removes videos that violate copyright law. What's different about Vidal's work getting pulled is that when he posted it in October, he was permitted to use Warner's music.

Until last month, YouTube had an agreement with Warner Music--one of the four largest recording companies--that allowed video creators to include the label's content in their clips. Last month, talks to renew the deal broke down and that means YouTube and its users no longer have access to Warner's library. For this reason, the case is much different than YouTube's high-profile fight with Viacom or run-of-the-mill piracy that once flourished on the site.
Sources close to the situation say YouTube is close to finalizing a new agreement with Sony Music.

In 2007, Viacom and YouTube failed to come to terms on a licensing deal and Viacom requested that YouTube pull its content. In that case, there was no prior agreement. Most of the people who posted Viacom's films or TV shows to YouTube did so without authorization. In this situation, YouTube fans used Warner Music's songs for two years with the label's blessing. Now, through no fault of their own, the videos that YouTube users made in good faith are being yanked.

"I don't understand who I'm harming," said Frank Stallone, a 41-year-old former DJ who is quick to point out that he is not the less-famous brother of the box office draw. Stallone's video was removed for using 45 seconds from "Forget Me Nots," a 1982 song from Patrice Rushen. "If anything, people are hearing the 45-second tease they haven't heard in a while and they'll want to go out and buy the song," he said.

Warner Music declined to comment, but YouTube had this to say: "While we work with music labels and publishers to keep music on the site, sometimes our negotiations don't pan out," said a spokesman for the company. "In those cases, we try to give people options when they receive a copyright claim. Instead of automatically blocking videos, we give uploaders the choice to dispute the claim (in the case of Fair Use, for example), use our AudioSwap tool to replace the track with one from our library of pre-cleared music, or to replace the video with a new version with no sound."

If nothing else, the situation serves as a warning to those who think that because YouTube obtains rights to music or films one day, the agreements will last forever. That's just not how these deals work.

I will yank my vid in hopes that one day YT & WMG can come to an agreement again. ITM, I might use a non-WMG (are there any?) artist's song and rework the vid or simply post only scenes featuring various beloved characters.

So much for creativity, eh??? Mad

_________________
"It has been a magnificent journey..." ~ Linda Dano, 1999 Daytime Emmys

https://twitter.com/AWFans