Pirated!

[colantalas]

If you're really concerned with making revenue from your music then why are you writing twenty minute symphonic prog jams? That's like the most un-commercial music I can think of.

Also, thanks to this thread I became aware that dailymotion is still around.

 

[Deleted member 165050]

If you're really concerned with making revenue from your music then why are you writing twenty minute symphonic prog jams? That's like the most un-commercial music I can think of.

I'm sure there must be even less commercial genres than symphonic prog, although I can't think of any right now

 

[Rev J]

I remember that Radiohead released "In Rainbows" online with a pay what you think it's worth kind of thing. A large portion of the fans did download it for free but the ones who did pay for it more than made up for the ones who didn't. Granted you need a Radiohead size fan base to make something like that work.

What's interesting about the new paradigm is that in the past there were 7 record labels that were subsidiaries of larger companies like Seagrams, Sony, Phillips etc. that controlled all of the distribution and production of recorded music (for example Phillips owns the patent on the CD so even if you aren't signed to Universal Phillips still gets a royalty off your CD) unless you were running your own mail order business or selling your stuff out of the trunk of your car). Now all of the parent companies of those 7 have "Digital Entertainment" divisions and ISP divisions. In the grand schemem of things these 7 companies are still in control of the distribution of almost all of the music that is bought sold or traded. As long as the internet bill is getting paid they are still getting their money now they don't have to cut you in.

C/S,
Rev J

 

[bassboysam]

I remember that Radiohead released "In Rainbows" online with a pay what you think it's worth kind of thing. A large portion of the fans did download it for free but the ones who did pay for it more than made up for the ones who didn't. Granted you need a Radiohead size fan base to make something like that work.

What's interesting about the new paradigm is that in the past there were 7 record labels that were subsidiaries of larger companies like Seagrams, Sony, Phillips etc. that controlled all of the distribution and production of recorded music (for example Phillips owns the patent on the CD so even if you aren't signed to Universal Phillips still gets a royalty off your CD) unless you were running your own mail order business or selling your stuff out of the trunk of your car). Now all of the parent companies of those 7 have "Digital Entertainment" divisions and ISP divisions. In the grand schemem of things these 7 companies are still in control of the distribution of almost all of the music that is bought sold or traded. As long as the internet bill is getting paid they are still getting their money now they don't have to cut you in.

C/S,
Rev J

that was also 10 years ago. i'm willing to bet Radiohead would not earn nearly as much if they did that today.

 

[dxb]

that was also 10 years ago. i'm willing to bet Radiohead would not earn nearly as much if they did that today.

I've often thought the same thing. Back when they did it it was new and interesting, but like kickstarter, once everyone starts doing it the novelty wears off. "Pay what you want" models are still around but I don't know if its something people regularly make use of. Like on Bandcamp, how many people who price their album really low but with the option for people to pay more, actually get more?

 

[bassboysam]

I've often thought the same thing. Back when they did it it was new and interesting, but like kickstarter, once everyone starts doing it the novelty wears off. "Pay what you want" models are still around but I don't know if its something people regularly make use of. Like on Bandcamp, how many people who price their album really low but with the option for people to pay more, actually get more?

we use the "pay what you want" with a minimum of $0. only 5%-10% of the people that download will pay more than $0. the average amount people pay is $3.00 but when you average the sales over total downloads comes to like $0.30. pretty sad.

 

[Deleted member 165050]

It's an interesting concept that makes people actively value the music they listen to. I doubt many would pay any more than the minimum they could get away with. I pay the full Spotify premium and as a result listen to a far wider range of music including much that I would never have bought (and still wouldn't)...

 

[jerry]

People post an artist newest releases in the recordings forum all the time!

 

[marmadaddy]

They are distributing for free, a track that is intended to be a purchased digital download. Putting it bluntly, that is stealing. Anyone who downloads in breach of copyright is a thief, like it or not. It costs money to make an album and the band has a way to go before we even cover costs. Download in breach of copyright and you are stealing from the copyright owner.

In our case it's unlikely to be a major loss and as many have said we will probably benefit from the extra publicity, but the underlying principle that illegal downloading is theft remains.

This isn't "illegal downloading" because it's not for personal use. If the person who uploaded it to Daily Motion derives any ad revenue when it's viewed then it's stealing your work and selling it as their own (publishing, copyright etc.). That's straight up theft. If that's the case, I'd send Daily Motion a DCMA takedown notice and and upload it myself.

 

[tfer]

Lars Ulrich got destroyed for his fight against Napster, but everything that he predicted has come true.

 

[Mechayoshi]

You know the saying "I must be old because..." well I'm the opposite. "I must be young because I don't see much issue posting songs on YouTube, especially since the actual artists and record labels do so (with ads)"

My bigger concern would be those sites that have full album downloads of cds that just came out. How those sites stay up I'll never know, but they were everywhere when I was in high school a few years ago. I can't imagine how plentiful they are now.

 

[Plantbrain]

Sure, but be warned we are a symphonic prog band focused on eco-political issues which to most people means long and boring!

The Emerald Dawn

Like most, artist get paid little and if at all. If it's a business or a web site that makes $(or not even), you have a case if you want to pursue it. Typically threatening them to take it down does the trick. The issue becomes when the thieves are in say Russia and/or behind 2-5 proxy servers.

Still, to steal someone's hard work ain't cool. Exposure might be cool, but if they honestly like you? They would ask, it's a simple polite thing. I have no issues with that. I'm not in this for $, perhaps you are not as well. But for many artist, it's stealing, plain and simple.

 

[js1]

This is a timely thread. I'll be releasing something shortly, and it's made me realize what I need to do before that.

My suggestion is that you create channels on Dailymotion and YouTube, prepare similar videos for all of your tracks (audio with pics), and put them up yourself. Then ask the person who posted the video to take it down voluntarily.

If that person is a fan, they'll do it voluntarily. If not, then they are a person that is trying to make money out of views. You can have a highly watched video and make money, or you can have a lot of videos that have a small number of views, and make money. So, if they don't take it down, it's DCMA time.

Your video can have a link to your band Facebook and website, where you have an opportunity to engage the potential fan and possibly sell them something. You can also stick a link in the video to direct people to actually buy your music.

Without exposure, people can't discover you. When they do discover you, you need to figure out what and how to get them to pay you money. What you have learned by what he's done is that there is interest in your music, and that it can be discovered. Now you need to take control back.

 

[bassboysam]

This is a timely thread. I'll be releasing something shortly, and it's made me realize what I need to do before that.

My suggestion is that you create channels on Dailymotion and YouTube, prepare similar videos for all of your tracks (audio with pics), and put them up yourself. Then ask the person who posted the video to take it down voluntarily.

If that person is a fan, they'll do it voluntarily. If not, then they are a person that is trying to make money out of views. You can have a highly watched video and make money, or you can have a lot of videos that have a small number of views, and make money. So, if they don't take it down, it's DCMA time.

Your video can have a link to your band Facebook and website, where you have an opportunity to engage the potential fan and possibly sell them something. You can also stick a link in the video to direct people to actually buy your music.

Without exposure, people can't discover you. When they do discover you, you need to figure out what and how to get them to pay you money. What you have learned by what he's done is that there is interest in your music, and that it can be discovered. Now you need to take control back.

the problem there is that your channel will likely have much fewer followers, thus the exposure benefit is going to be minimal compared to an established channel with lots of followers/subscribers.

 

[catcauphonic]

If it were my band, we'd probably just ask them to credit the audio to us, and insert a link so anyone interested in hearing more or browsing merch can do so easily.

 

[Calaverasgrande]

I'd make sure the video gives attribution. Mentions your band by name in the info section, and provides a link to your site, and/or online presence where your stuff can be purchased.

You could fight to get it taken down, or you could look at it as an opportunity to reach more listeners?

OTOH, my ex-girlfriend and I produced a video compilation of punk bands and young video artists years (many years) ago. We got permission from all the people involved, and the video was pretty successful as a VHS tape which we duped and packaged ourselves. (yeah VHS, I did say it was many years ago).
Well time passes and I stopped making copies. I get bugged fairly regularly for a while by Subterranean records and a few other labels that we should re-release it on DVD.
So I contact the bands. Most are on board except for one band who is still somewhat active. They are a Bay Area band named Neurosis. At the time of the tape they were a hardcore punk band with metal influences. They've since gone on to be a very influential experimental post-metal act. They are also very conscious of how the band's branding and imaging is presented. So while I'm still friends with a few people in the band, they won't agree to a re-release in original form.
And frankly I cannot blame them. The video we produced in 1991 was pretty ham handed!
Point being, I'd be upset if my bands music was posted online underlaying visuals which I find personally or politically offensive.

 

[tzohn]

May we add the role of the record labels into that? In the 80's and 90's listening to music was an expensive hobby. I don't know how much money were actually going to the artists but paying $10-$20 for a vinyl or CD was a lot. Add to that the fact that buying a new album or artist it was actually a lottery ticket. I have countless vinyls and CDs that played just once in my stereo because they sucked. I always preferred having the original case with the booklet, artwork etc but $15 is too much, so I don't buy music anymore.

 

[js1]

the problem there is that your channel will likely have much fewer followers, thus the exposure benefit is going to be minimal compared to an established channel with lots of followers/subscribers.

Perhaps. I haven't checked to see if the channel fits your description. If it is posted on a channel with a lot of followers, and you don't want to lose that exposure, I can see two options:

• Post your version as well. Label it "OFFICIAL". YouTube suggests related videos, and your videos should show up in the related list.
  
• Ask the person to post your version with the link backs to buying the music.

Exposure feels good and all. But, from a business perspective, you want to translate that into money to you.

 

[klejst]

Someone once said "no publicity is bad publicity" and another once said "the Internet is making it so much easier these days for artists to be heard by millions" so take those for what they are worth...as long as you don't have the mindset to go all Lars about.

 

[Wonekawa]

We released our album August 21st, by today (27th) the longest track (20 minutes) is up on Daily Motion as a free video! At least the poster offered to take it down if we feel copyright is "affected"...

Is this just how it is now? I mean why would anyone pirate an obscure prog band from Cornwall ffs?

On the plus side we got our first bad review yesterday, so I feel acknowledged

Wishing and your band the very best of luck..