Content ID… Round 2?

Home Forums General Questions Content ID… Round 2?

Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #11536 Reply
    Lupo
    Guest

    Hello everyone, I’ve been reading threads on Audiam and contentID for a while now but it’s still not very clear what is going on.
    for example this assumption by MichaelL:

    The important thing to take away from it is that Scott Schreer is not making 30K a month from a Youtube video. He made $120.

    seems to be either true or false depending on what article you read.
    reading the LA times for example looks like Mr Schreer did make indeed those 30k on YouTube alone in 4 weeks (actually the became 40k in the article).

    Seems an awful lot of money even for a very successful composer like him.

    I wonder where the marketing spin starts and where reality ends…probably the only safe way to know for sure would be to ask Mr Schreer himself!

    #11537 Reply
    Lupo
    Guest

    sorry that link to teh article didn’t make it through here is is

    http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/25/business/la-fi-ct-audiam-royalties-20130725

    #11538 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    Not assuming anything Lupo. Here’s what the LA times articles says:

    Scott Schreer, the composer behind the “NFL on Fox” theme, has written scores of instrumental pieces that people use for free in their videos. With Audiam, he now can collect money from videos that use any of his 2,000 songs, such as the slide guitar-fueled rock piece “Misfit.” In his first four weeks using Audiam, he said, the service collected about $40,000 from YouTube videos using his music.

    Here’s what the BusinessWeek,com article says:

    A May Audiam search for just one of his 1,700 songs, a two-minute, saxophone-heavy acid-jazz instrumental called Love Doctor, revealed 100,000 video plays using the song without paying for it over a period of 11 days. That search netted Schreer $120 in licensing fees from YouTube, he says. He’s collecting about $30,000 a month overall from his music catalog.

    I highlighted the important points. If you read closely, you’ll see that, yes, he is making $30,000 to $40,000 per month, but not from just one song. He makes that from his entire 1,700 to 2,000 cue catalog. He made $120 in 11 days from 100,000 views of a video using “Love Doctor.” So, that would be $360 in a month, for one song. Mr. Schreer has 1,700 to 2,000 songs, some of which are well known. That’s where the 30 to 40K is coming from.

    Both of these articles are examples of the kind of press release that record label publicists do. I know, I owned a label. Mr. Schreer is not a starving composer, who has new found riches, thanks to Audiam. He is one of the owners of Audiam, and the purpose of the articles is to attract composers to Audiam, by implying that they will have similar success. While you may possibly see some benefit, it is analogous to suggesting that by wearing Nike sneakers, you’ll be as successful as Michael Jordan. In the realm of production music, Mr. Schreer is a Michael Jordan.

    Would I, or will I, use their service? … quite possibly for TV themes that I own that might be getting unauthorized uses. But, with respect to the RF part of my catalog, I’m steering clear of content ID, unless those cues are exclusive (in accordance with YT’s TOS).

    _Michael

    #11541 Reply
    Mark Lewis
    Participant

    @lupo
    I think this would be the more appropriate quote to pull from the article you pointed to:

    “Robert Levine, a former executive editor at Billboard who wrote the book “Free Ride,” said most artists who use Audiam will generate only a handful of cash, but it could be a successful business for Audiam if it gets a lot of customers”

    Since Audiam is an exclusive deal I really do not understand the confusion. I guess if you want to pull all of your music from all non-exclusive music libraries and solely depend on possible earnings from Audiam then that is a risk you would have to take.
    I think you might have trouble convincing many of the composers in this forum who are actually making a living with their production music catalogs to jump ship and bet the farm on youtube “royalties”.

    PS- if you think you are getting millions and millions of plays of your music on youtube that you can monetize why not simply sign up for the youtube contentID system yourself instead of splitting the earnings with Audiam?
    That is the part of this situation that is really confusing to me.

    -Mark

    #11544 Reply
    Lupo
    Guest

    Hold your horses Mark, I’m definitely NOT trying to convince anyone here.

    I’m just trying to understand, in this case specifically: did Schreer’s catalog made him 30k (or 40) from YouTube revenues alone in 4 weeks ?

    I too used to have a record label and also worked in marketing, that’s why I take those statement with a grain of salt.

    And…Audiam exclusivity is only related to managing licensing on YouTube correct? They can act as a full blown publisher but that’s optional as far as I understood it.

    Now my take on contentID is a different matter altogether.
    My gut feeling is that is something that could be crucial to redefine copyright as we know it.
    At the moment seems to me there’s an epic battle between Reality Vs Copyright holders, we’re caught in the middle trying to make a living while new business models come and go (retitling, RF etc).

    In my opinion if contentID could be spread worldwide, all across the mediums, with a efficient way to manage licensing, it could be a good thing for us. I know contentID doesn’t fill in cuesheet, but one fingerprint to each composer makes a lot sense to me.

    I must admit I haven’t contemplated all the business implications involved, so I could well be wrong. Hopefully we’ll work out some answers here.

    #11546 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    @Lupo, unless the stats have changed, about 30% of YT videos get 99% of the views. About half the videos get less than 500 views, and many get less than 100 views.

    At about $.012 per view, the vast majority of people will make very little money, even if everyone on the planet is watching YT.

    Probably a great tool for promoting your band. Not so much, right now, if you write production music.

    BTW..RF is not a new business model. I produced over 20 RF collections in the 1980’s. It’s been around a long time.

    From a legal perspective, the only thing that will change copyright law, as we know it (in the US), will be legislation or litigation. How do you envision YT changing copyright law? We’ll have to accomodate piracy becuase so many people are doing it? I don’t see SCOTUS or the US Congress going down tha road.

    _Michael

    #11549 Reply
    Mark Lewis
    Participant

    Now my take on contentID is a different matter altogether.
    My gut feeling is that is something that could be crucial to redefine copyright as we know it.

    I think you need to do some more research on what the youtube contentID system actually is.
    Good luck.

    #11551 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    What Mark said.

    #11553 Reply
    Lupo
    Guest

    Sometimes I wonder if I have entirely forgotten how to communicate in english…

    #11556 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    Sometimes I wonder if I have entirely forgotten how to communicate in english…

    I don’t think that you’ve forgotten how to communicate. I, for one, need to remind myself that this is an international forum, and that language differences may give rise to different interpretations and meanings of the same subject.

    Cheers,
    Michael

    #11568 Reply
    DP
    Guest

    When people misrepresent themselves as industry professionals, and they’ve downloaded thousands of your cues after access has been granted to them (not to ever hear from them again), Content ID begins to sound appealing.

    Given this, why go with Audium when you can go direct with YouTube? I’m guessing exclusive rights holders who aren’t tech/media savvy opt to give a % to a company that will handle it all.

    Talk amongst yourselves…

    #11571 Reply
    MichaelL
    Participant

    @DP…very few of us would not want to participate in content ID, but are between a rock and a hard place.

    I am the exclusive rights holder of my music, not any library through which I market my music. In theory, I should be able to participate in content ID.

    The issue, if you’ve read this thread and all of the others, is that content ID creates problems for royalty free libraries and their customers, e.g. competitor’s ads placed on their videos and copyright violation notices etc. If you figure out how to work around that, we’ll all be on the bandwagon.

    Until then, writers’ options are to 1) not participate in content ID, or
    2) to market through one RF library exclsuively.

    Most writers don’t have “thousands of cues.” Until internet royalties become substantial, option 2 is not viable for those with small or modest RF catalogs, who rely on income from numerous libraries.

    If non-content-ID writers are interested in policing their catalogs, perhaps tunesat, or Audible Magic are options. At least then, they could detect the kind of theft/infringement that you describe.

    _Michael

    #11593 Reply
    DP
    Guest

    @Michael, points well taken and as a writer I can certainly appreciate those concerns. HOWEVER, if someone steals my wind machine, rest assured I’m raising the sails.

    #13223 Reply
    soph
    Guest

    Can anyone tell me who adshare Mg acts on behalf of?

    I’m getting some false claims on some tracks.

Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)
Reply To: Content ID… Round 2?
Your information:





X

Forgot Password?

Join Us