AfterDawn: Tech news

YouTube new target for RIAA

Written by Ben Reid @ 04 Jun 2006 8:35 User comments (31)

YouTube new target for RIAA As the Recording Industry continues in its battle to combat rife online music piracy on P2P networks, blogs and other viral distribution channels, it appears to have a new problem in the form of music videos.
Content on sites such as YouTube, MySpace, Google Video and iFilm is user-generated, which has given a whole new dimension to the viral sharing of music videos across the web. Such websites allow music videos to be distributed without any approval from the recording companies.

This has caught the attention of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and in recent weeks, it has been stepping up its efforts to stop sharing of popular videos on YouTube. The site, which boasts over 6 million visitors and 40 million streams per day, has become a harbor for unlicensed music videos, much of which is coming from MTV broadcasts which are recorded by users with TiVo and other digital video recorders and posted onto the site.

The RIAA recently dealt cease-and-desist letters to some YouTube users caught sharing unlicensed music videos of popular artists. Links to videos taken down by the RIAA now give the greeting, "This video has been removed at the request of copyright owner the RIAA because its content was used without permission."

The major labels believe that it's the responsibility of such sites to monitor the content passing through their own communities. But so far, they have been targeting only individuals who use these sites to share popular music videos. The problem with this seems to be that many of the videos that the major labels have requested be removed have quickly reappeared on the site within days, and industry sources believe this supports the requirement for stricter filtering by all viral video specialists.

Both the RIAA and YouTube have declined to comment.

Source:
Washington Post

Previous Next  

31 user comments

14.6.2006 8:52
gogochar
Inactive

Quote:
Such websites allow music videos to be distributed without any approval from the recording companies.
We don't need the permission from the RIAA to share our videos. And not all of it is music videos! Fair use allows us to do whatever we want with media, so long as we already own it, don't have any plans to distribute it for profit, etc. YouTube is free and there's nothing wrong with it. Just because it doesn't have a pricetag, doesn't mean the RIAA has to put one on it. Or even worse, try to stop it!

24.6.2006 9:26

Im new to these kinda websites, But why are they talking to the users,RIAA should be talking to youtube etc. When you sign up to these sites they tell you, you cant put stuff like that on there. Youtube should be banning people, Dont get me wrong Im all for shareing but what are you gonna do. http://peekvid.com/ http://www.guba.com/

34.6.2006 10:01
flyingv
Inactive

This entire thing with the RIAA is getting out of control!!! They make me want to not listen, or watch, anything anymore because i'm afraid that no matter what I do, it's against the law. This "Group" needs to just back off and leave the people alone and then maybe it will give some dignity back to the music industry form which it stripped away to begin with!!!

44.6.2006 10:27

I'm just gonna wait for the day that the RIAA sues itself for not making enough profits in a single fiscal year and then win. Then they have the federal government pay them for not making enough money.

54.6.2006 10:32

i agree there gettin out of control now, im not worried aba watchin the stuff, but there takin the mick now, soon they will be wantin to ban google an so on. they are a bunch of no good wasters, they obviously aint got nothin better to do if there goin after you tube. sum1 needs to fight them back

64.6.2006 10:34

Quote:
We don't need the permission from the RIAA to share our videos. And not all of it is music videos! Fair use allows us to do whatever we want with media, so long as we already own it, don't have any plans to distribute it for profit, etc. YouTube is free and there's nothing wrong with it. Just because it doesn't have a pricetag, doesn't mean the RIAA has to put one on it. Or even worse, try to stop it!
they are targeting COPYRIGHTED music video... not all videos and not the whole website. They are not foring the website to charge or trying to take the website down. The RIAA just doesn't want music video's on there and i think thats fair. either take down the video or get fined. also for the second post. youtube cannot watch every single video and delete the ones that are copyrighted. like they said 40 million videos streams per day. they cannot monitor all those videos. so RIAA should be talking to the users instead of the whole site. why would you want the site to go down over some stupid music videos which can be found for free at AOL musicvideos, yahoo, even msn has free music videos. you might think im for the RIAA but im not... i don't like them just as much as the next guy but im just speaking the truth because alot of you don't understand.

74.6.2006 13:11

so we can watch the videos on TV, for free, and on sites such as Yahoo! launch, for free. And MTV.com, for free. But not YouTube/GoogleVideos? WTF? They really are going too far now. It's stupid.

84.6.2006 14:02

ROFL!!! They're going to start going after myspace?! Thats the funniest damn thing I've ever heard...hey people! Now you can't make your own personal profile showing the songs you like! You know why? It's COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT! bs....whats next? singing happy birthday will get you arrested?

94.6.2006 15:08
jazo1234
Inactive

@esrever

Quote:
whats next? singing happy birthday will get you arrested?
Yes.

104.6.2006 17:08
wunko
Inactive

Fair use doesn't allow you to do whatever you want with media. Fair use just lets you record it if you want for your own personal use, which doesn't allow for distribution. If you post a video on youtube.com you've just infringed copyright, unless you got permission from the copyright owner. The best way to find out what your local rights are when it comes to copyrighted material is to go to your countries copyright website, they give you all the info you need.

114.6.2006 19:28

This is getting ridiculous, they're trying to take away every form of expression there is. YouTube makes it easy and convenient to see the videos you want to see. I can understand wanting to take down full episodes of shows and such(if this is really done), but music videos? COME ON! We don't get music videos anymore!!! There's no such thing as Music Television, it's just a bunch of crappy shows! Yeah I can seriouslly understand WHY they want YouTube users to take down the content, I just don't like it. I hope they don't get really serious and take down material that uses the original but then ads its own stuff to it (i.e. Juggernaut Bitch! search it on YouTube if it's still up). btw if you were to sing the Happy Birthday song in a movie you would have to pay royalties cause Michael Jackson owns the rights to that.

124.6.2006 20:28

whats next? singing happy birthday will get you arrested? The Happy Birthday song is copy righted, although i am not sure who owns it. That is why most restuaurants make up their own version of the happy birthday song.

134.6.2006 20:49

"they are targeting COPYRIGHTED music video... not all videos and not the whole website. They are not foring the website to charge or trying to take the website down. The RIAA just doesn't want music video's on there and i think thats fair. either take down the video or get fined."- Correct me if I'm wrong, but whose making money off of music videos. They sell them on dvd at retail stores and maybe on the internet, but no one actually buys them. Whats more is why they would be discouraging people from spreading music videos around. A smart person would see this as a way of reaching audiences that otherwise have never seen the video; thereby bolstering record sails. This whole issue is ludicrous. Plain and simple, I'll share whatever i want to share and as long as im not making any money off of it, there's not a damn thing anyone can say to me about it( copywritten or otherwise)

144.6.2006 21:11

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but whose making money off of music videos. They sell them on dvd at retail stores and maybe on the internet, but no one actually buys them. Whats more is why they would be discouraging people from spreading music videos around. A smart person would see this as a way of reaching audiences that otherwise have never seen the video; thereby bolstering record sails. This whole issue is ludicrous. Plain and simple, I'll share whatever i want to share and as long as im not making any money off of it, there's not a damn thing anyone can say to me about it( copywritten or otherwise)
okay still alot of people don't get it. a music video promotes the artist and the album for that artist. music video's are in fact for sale on itunes. would you want to make a shirt design just so someone can copy the same exact thing and resell it and you not make any money from it?
Quote:
so we can watch the videos on TV, for free, and on sites such as Yahoo! launch, for free. And MTV.com, for free. But not YouTube/GoogleVideos? WTF? They really are going too far now. It's stupid.
yes you watch it on tv, but there are commercials following music videos, yes you can watch it on sites such as yahoo, but they have advertisements all over the place, yes you can watch it on mtv.com but again has commercials. Yahoo INC and MTV.com pay the artist to use their video's and you have to watch an advertisement so tech. its not free. Youtube doesn't pay the Artist to use their music video's so they are losing money to where mtv pays by how many views that music video recieves... you think a popular music video on mtv.com is going to get paid as much as a un-popular music video.. NO.. it goes by how popular the video is.

154.6.2006 21:38

time warner owns the rights to happy birthday

165.6.2006 1:50

On the news a little while back I seen that some one was buying all the .com's of famous famous people and chargeing them thousands to get there name back, ex. willsmith.com brucewills.com etc. I just wanted to stick that in there and say thats crazy

175.6.2006 4:04

@NINVIN21 what your refering to is cybersquatting.

Quote:
I just wanted to stick that in there and say thats crazy
anything for a quick buck aye?

185.6.2006 8:38

IMHO, once a piece of media has been broadcast over the PUBLIC AIRWAVES (or the internet, which I consider to be a public network) I don't care what copyright BS is claimed. It has been distributed to the public. It is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN. Game over, thanks for playing.

195.6.2006 14:23

***so we can watch the videos on TV, for free, and on sites such as Yahoo! launch, for free. And MTV.com, for free. But not YouTube/GoogleVideos? WTF? They really are going too far now. It's stupid. ***** *******************Actualy************************ I am not for the RIAA or the or the MPAA..... However did you know that it is illegal for you to buy a video and take it to a friends house to watch it....? Same with recordings, you buy an album and it is illegal for you to take it to a friends house and play it.... that would be considered re-broadcasting ,,, and that is illegal and is defined in the user agreement you agree to every time you buy a CD or DVD or VHS (read the fine print). If the record industry and movie industry had a way to enforce this they would( but how can they know what some one is watching behind close door.) BUT !!!! (here is the new scary catch) All of the next generation TVs and and stereo equipment will use a connector called HDVI..... This HDVI format had the digital rights managment built right into the connectors. So if you connect a DVD or video game console ( PS3) it will also need a HDVI conector. Here is the kick in the pants..... If you do not hanve rights to that video you will not get an image on the screen or sound over the stereo...... (you know like how Itunes only allows for play-back on 4 players and requires activation to unlock a new device.) The RIAA and the MPAA are going to start trying to enforce the licening regulations. ( and on top of that thay are going to keep raising prices, new Blue ray disks will start retailing at almost $35). Personaly I stopped buying CDs when they started costing over $12 or $13 (long before p2p downloading was available) Artist need to stop selling themselves and their creativity for an easy buck or a nice looking contract. And consumers need to stop paying for such worthless services.... Like homogonised, mcmusic and mcmovies that promote an empty life of wealth worship.

205.6.2006 14:24
duckNrun
Inactive

I get the copyright/loss of income thing. I get that Yahoo et al are not free for various reasons involving either subscriptions or ad watching (pay with your time!) It is LEGAL to record a video off of the TV for personal use. Once recorded it can be watched for free, it can be edited for free, commercials can be cut for free, it can be mixed with other videos for free. Once it hits the airwaves or satellite waves (lol) it has been distributed by said copyright holder. The act of the initial distribution gives everyone and anyone a LEGAL right to record, and use, it for personal use. Now I understand that the argument goes: well if YOU didn't record it at the time of broadcast then you have no RIGHT to watch it unless you pay for that right through legit channels (yahoo, itunes etc) BUT the fact remains that due to the broadcast it has been put out there for 6 BILLION people to watch (and legally record or timeshift as the term goes) so is there no REAl diff between me setting to record it on my vcr or tivo or getting it from the web AFTER IT HAS ALREADY BEEN PUBLICLY displayed? Some say yes, some say no. Same goes for regular music. I can record off the radio legally... and edit out commercials as well as make playlists... so once a song has been played (generally over and over and over) on the radio (or internet radio i.e Yahoo et al)where i could record it for free is there really any diff if I record it from a friend instead? Basically what the industry is saying (though not what they want to be said) is to personally RECORD every media stream that we can get our hands on. Record everysingle tv channel 24/7, every radio station... and then we can legally have ALL of the media. If you are unable to record/store everything at the time it is broadcast (and paid for in terms of your cable bill, xm bill, yahoo subscription et al) then you must pay again...and again... and again.. there has to be a reasonable middle ground that protects consumer rights and copyrights. btw a cable company is getting ready to do just what i proposed: recording every single channel they offer and offering it up for OnDemand viewing... of course the MPAA cried foul and says that it only works if YOU AND I do it.. not if we pay another (the cable co.) do to it for us....

215.6.2006 19:09

wow,unreal nice posts. You said about taking a video to a friends That is illegel, So that would go the Same If I let the people in my household watch the video? What about Pay-per-view channels? They want to much $ for HD stuff anyways but I better get into If I want My ps3 to look like it should. I also did not no that about Itunes Wow, What a *****

225.6.2006 20:59

I just wanna know where all the money to support the RIAA is coming from, is it tax dollars, or is it that extra few bucks that I have to pay for a 20 dollar cd? Or is it a non-profit organization hell bent on ruining everything and suing everyone in the states for one reason or another. Well I just went to the RIAA website, and on one of its pages it says "Permission to cite or copy these statistics is hereby granted as long as proper attribution is given to the Recording Industry Association of America." if you don't give them proper attribution for copying their statistics they are going to sue you, thats what I get out of this. WTF this company is a load of crap, they say they are so worried about their artists, bs they just want the checks to line their pockets. RIAA just needs to go back to certifying gold records, and STFU.

236.6.2006 0:23

I've been using You Tube for a couple months and for the most part I do like it there. As far as copywrited material is concerned, if it's a music video that's already been hanging around for a while and it's popular, I don't see what the big deal is about sharing those online to those who'd like to see them as well. I can understand where the RIAA is coming from, but at the same time I think in some areas they need to chill a little bit. You Tube is NOT sites like Pirate Bay nor any of the torrent download sites where there's complete movies, television series and so forth broadcast. Now granted, I have come across some pieces within the You Tube pages that have stuff that extends beyond it's typical music video length, but very little of it. Then again, I'm not really looking for such files. I'm only interested in the music videos and music pieces that I literally can't access anywhere else. Many of the music videos I've come across through You Tube are those I've either never seen before or just never have the fortune to see on stations like MTV, nor the Canadian version, Muchmusic. In all honesty, I don't care for either station as they all too often focus on "today's music" rather than the kind of stuff I'd prefer listening (and watching) to. Unfortunately, there's always going to be a site somewhere that's going to stay one step ahead of the RIAA, the major labels and so forth. As soon as one site is shut down, there's at least another willing to take it's place. And for the most part, if an individual can save a few dollars by merely downloading material they're going to do it. I've done it, but I also make the actual purchases from time to time as well. In all honesty, even without the ability to download "copywrited" material the amount of money I'd be spending on things like CD's, DVD's, movie tickets and so forth would remain unchanged. For what it's worth, before the "dawn" of online file sharing, I used to connect 2 VCR's together during the 80's and 90's and copy things like music videos, commercials, tv shows and so forth from one tape to another because a friend or relative wanted what I had. Now with technology vastly improved since the 80's, even without the online route a person can still record what they're watching on TV, then make a copy of it and submit it to whoever else may be interested...and the RIAA would still miss out because the opportunity to make a sale off one particular customer has been lost because he/she knew of someone who'd make a copy for them at no charge other than perhaps the purchase of a blank CD, video tape or recordable DVD. There's stuff I find on You Tube that I've already seen countless times on TV and I don't see the big deal about that stuff being shared online. Chances are if I've seen it countless times, so have others. The fact that it's shared online simply provides another channel...one which each user can access whenever they feel like it instead of waiting for the TV networks to get around airing them...shouldn't be a big deal. I find most often whenever a company feels their profits are in danger they begin to act up. In the beginning their motives are justified, but in time sometimes such companies wind up becoming too paranoid for their own good and will literally target anything and everything in fear they may just lose yet another dollar from their profit margin. You Tube is not quite the threat to the RIAA like Pirate Bay or Torrent Portal. Granted, I will agree that I feel there should be better administration within the site, but I still don't see them to be any kind of a real problem.

246.6.2006 10:27

I think that it is absolute crap. This is so incredibly ridiculous, if I am going to pay taxes, then utilize my tax money to fighting terrorists and protecting our country. Don't use it to condemn and arrest people that have no intention of harming others. Something or somebody to needs to seriously step up to RIAA and/or about 10 or more companies should come together and stand up and fight against them. Bring those intolerable RIAA members to their knees and swing the sword.

256.6.2006 10:28

Quote:
It is LEGAL to record a video off of the TV for personal use. Once recorded it can be watched for free, it can be edited for free, commercials can be cut for free, it can be mixed with other videos for free. Once it hits the airwaves or satellite waves (lol) it has been distributed by said copyright holder. The act of the initial distribution gives everyone and anyone a LEGAL right to record, and use, it for personal use.
Actually its not Legal, you need concent from that channel if you want that copy. for example if you want to record the game. You need concent from ABC and the NFL. Yea its pretty lame but items such as TiVo. well they are mostly used for playback if you missed the episode. Thats why the RIAA was and still is targeting XM radio. They came out with a recorder that is portable and you can take with you.. almost like a mp3 player. And that is illegal.

266.6.2006 16:57

I agree with flyingv. I'm afraid that one day I'll be walking down the street humming a tune, only to have a lawyer threaten to sue me on behalf of their client if I don't stop humming immediately. If it ever comes to that, I look forward to my day in court against the artist.... "Hey, A$$hole, I'm listening to your song in my head. I downloaded it from the CD my friend was playing in his car". LOL I bet it will happen eventually. As long as there's lawyers, we'll never truly be free.

276.6.2006 19:44

"okay still alot of people don't get it. a music video promotes the artist and the album for that artist. music video's are in fact for sale on itunes. would you want to make a shirt design just so someone can copy the same exact thing and resell it and you not make any money from it?"- If it was a promotional t-shirt for an album I was trying to get people to buy yeah; and yes i do record music. I'm trying to figure out what the difference would be if i recorded a music video off of television and put it on a multimedia device. Is that illegal too, even though the technology involved is clearly legal.

286.6.2006 19:49

OK bottomline. If you care about paying these multimillionaires light bill go ahead. I don't. They can't tell me what I'm doing is wrong because it isn't and they aren't losing any money from me because i would have never bought their music video otherwise( only a truly technologically incompitent individual would waste money buying music videos). Especailly when music television stations run them into the ground all day everyday.

296.6.2006 20:00

I've said this once and I "ll say it again, everyone should move to Canada (my wonderful country) cause by law we are protected.


Hey, Wait, I've Got a New Complaint,Forever In Debt To Your Priceless Advice :P

307.6.2006 12:04
eliteal
Inactive

if these people put all the effort into stopping real criminals instead of afew uploads and dloads the world would be a better place as i read on another site earlier only way to stop it all is close the internet lol yeah can really see that happening ;) thats my 2cents worth

3110.6.2006 3:51

Music videos are advertising tools. The more people that see them, the better the advertisement is working. If they don't want anyone to see the advertisements without paying for them they shold not broadcast them in the first place; then they'd be advertisements that no-one sees. Genius. Actually as advertisements of all hues are becoming too prevalent, perhaps they are doing us a favour. If they could just stop all the junk mail too . . .

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive