Warner trolls on YouTube
 

The evil empire shut down both of my accounts. Bastards. :distress:

I wonder if they're planning to start up their own Mac channel for the upcoming tour.

So all of your videos are gone?

Yep. I guess they freaked out when they saw that the Gypsy vid had received 1.2 million views. Stupid record label, behind the times as usual, and taking it out on the consumer. :mad:

Dumb question, but how is that costing WB money?

It doesn't. The vast majority of people who don't already own the song will download the song from iTunes or Amazon or buy the CD.

Then it seems like they have no reason to do that to you. From what I know, youre not that type of guy I.E doing illigeal **** like that so sounds like paranoia to me.

They're just approaching it all wrong. These are the same people who thought slapping grandma and 8-year-old girls with lawsuits for illegally downloading three songs would send a compelling message to the public... Well maybe one...the record industry is full of idiots!

That is so stupid. Idiots. YouTube is both free promotion and a great service to fans. Do they have an "official" Gypsy video unloaded? I hope they totally self-destruct. The whole music industry needs to accept this new technology, that this is way music is heading (and where it IS), and to work in that context in a new and innovative way. Bastards.

Warner's in negotiations with Youtube as well as Google (Video)- they're looking for the best (most profitable) company to partner with.

In the meantime, you can watch all of Fleetwood Mac's official music videos on vh1.com.

No official Gypsy video posted. :rolleyes: Given that YouTube is largest social networking platform online today, you'd think this would be the first place they'd go to make deals.

That's crazy. :shocked: Seriously, how is this costing them money? It isn't. If there was an official DVD with music videos and live shows, and you posted them on YouTube, then maybe I can understand why they'd take your channels down. Insanity.

Actually, that's not true anymore. Warner Music Group wanted more money, and they were all unable to reach an agreement on the cash - negotiations have now ended entirely. Warner Music Group was the first such organization to make a deal with YouTube, and now the first one to also walk out on it.

So what's happening now is that YouTube themselves are yanking ALL Warner Music Group content entirely - even from the "official" channels of the actual Warner artists. For example, I can go look at Mastodon's channel and view any of the videos made for albums on the Relapse label, but I cannot view any made for their Warner albums.

The antics of companies like this never fail to crack me up - they are dumb as a bag of hammers not to want to capitalize on the enormous amount of extremely low-overhead publicity and marketing potential the 'net offers.

Warner and Lars Ulrich should get together and go bowling.

Idjits.

Yep. When it comes to marketing and Fleetwood Mac, Warner's has always been genius. Not.

They took my Needles and Pins video down too. That was my vid with the most views. D:

Ggrrr. *sympathy hug*

Oh Daniel, I am sorry they are doing this to you. WB is just so far behind the times. If they do this, I only hope there is a valid reason, like beefing up the FM site or something.

Since Lindsey has embraced YouTube, I was wondering if FM will be releasing tour stuff or something official on YouTube or not. One can only hope and dream right? I mean it would be awesome if there was behind the scenes official FM stuff posted to YouTube. Can you imagine the number of hits a video would get if there was behind the scenes stuff with Stevie or whoever? To me, that would be the smart thing to do.

:distress:
They took down As Long as You Follow, the most beautiful wintertime video ever.

(I found it's still on AOL Video, though ;))

The likely culprit removing our content is probably You Tube itself. We automatically assume Warner Music Group is the goat. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions based on the history of the label and how it's treated fans or artists in the past. Does anyone know Warner Music Group is no longer owned and operated by the same corporate entity that released Fleetwood Mac for the past thirty years? Remember when we heard all kinds of flack about the evils of WB corporate management during the change in artistic control which took place between the release of the Dance and SYW? Lindsey mentioned the new guard, of AOL/Time/Warner people at WB records, quite a lot during the SYW promo period. Much hay was made about their corporate control of artists during LB's first attempt at releasing GOS, up through the time period covering TISL and the release of SYW including the subsequent mega tour. Hardly a word's been uttered about the private equity firm that's owned and operated Warner's music division since 2005. It's a completely different label with a different focus. Strange how Lindsey in particular hasn't mentioned anything about this changing of the guard overseeing the release of his two back to back solo albums. :shrug:

One of the first things the new Warner Music Group did differently from the past was embrace the internet. Until a few weeks ago when the deal ended, YouTube and Warner Music had an interesting revenue based promotional agreement breaking new ground for the music industry. That deal just ended. It's probably the reason WB fans had their content raided at You Tube. YT is pissed that Warner's wanted and subsequently went shopping for a better deal. The revenue stream at You Tube isn't panning out as expected. WB is seeking a more promising online partner. Not sure they will find one, but either way, it could be at WB's order, or YT unilaterally pulling the plug on our content in retaliation against WB.

Warner Music Group is not the same entity as the corporate conglomerate that still operates other parts of AOL/Time/Warner. In fact, several of the people known to be at the helm of the new WB music label are players who broke a lot of ground at Interscope records in it's heyday as an indie, and when that label was first taken over by Universal Music Group. Some of the same investors, too. It will be interesting to see how everything plays out in the near future at the new Warner's Music, as it relates to internet marketing, artistic control of content, and how well it handles dinosaur bands like Fleetwood Mac. How innovative can they be with a band touring behind no new music, selling the nostalgia nobody can afford to enjoy these days? Time precious time will tell.

I never knew there was such a thing.....I listen to that all the time while working out. Any chance you could post it here?

Thanks in advance....

Sarah

Yeah, I suspect this might be the case, too. But who knows, it's taken them almost 5 years to update that website. I think they need a new project manager.

This is correct. As I said before - it's YouTube now yanking all Warner Music Group content, because negotiations have ended without coming to an agreement.

Yes, instead of DR and Cory's diary, we could have some back stage footage from each of the tour stops. FM's marketing people are not savvy enough to do anything like that, but it certainly would be fun and would keep interest in the tour at a high level. Michele

If this were the case, wouldn't they state it was YouTube removing the video and not a third party? In the notice I received, the copyright owner is complaining about the audio track, which belongs to Warner...no? :

Dear SpyNote,

A copyright owner has claimed it owns some or all of the audio content in your video Fleetwood Mac Stevie Nicks Gypsy. The audio content identified in your video is Gypsy by Fleetwood Mac. We regret to inform you that your video has been blocked from playback due to a music rights issue.

That doesn't have to mean some minion over at WMG saw it today was like, "Oi, yank that video!" and YouTube scurried to comply with the demand - due to the prior deal with WMG, they will know what belongs to whom without the "Oi!" being involved. Unless Google was berzerk enough to give WMG access to the servers, then WMG couldn't yank the junk themselves, anyway. The notice you got looks to me like an extension of the semantics game both sides are playing over the issue.

In the post on the YouTube blog about the happenings, they say we "may notice content being blocked" but pointedly does NOT say it's WMG actively insisting on it. WMG's statement talks about how unhappy they are about the whole thing and says the music is coming down, but doesn't say they are the ones insisting on it, either.

I've read several articles where the writer's sources claim this is the case - YouTube/Google doing the yanking of their own accord, like, "Fine, you can't be reasonable - now you get NO money and NO exposure via our site." Even if I hadn't read that, I would think this was the case, because it's the smart move to make and YouTube/Google are pretty damn smart.

They were the ones being taken advantage of, and in doing the yanking, would be calling WMG's bluff. The original deal that was made with WMG and basically meant that YouTube/Google had to pay the label a certain amount each time someone viewed a video, whether or not that viewer generated any ad revenue - meaning YouTube/Google had to pay even when it didn't make any money itself. This was fine up until WMG decided it wanted MORE money, and threw a tantrum when Google wasn't willing to give them more (because it wouldn't make financial sense for them to do so), so that's how we got to where we are.

The label is too greedy and incomprehensibly stupid when it comes to understanding just what they are throwing away here in terms of inexpensive marketing and exposure. And you'll notice that regardless of what anyone says to the contrary, people are angry at WMG for the debacle and not YouTube/Google - so it's WMG losing out here on ALL fronts.

For now, we'll still find a lot of WMG content online over there, because it will take a long time to get rid of everything. Then I imagine that there will be the constant patrolling thereafter to keep it away, unless someone at WMG smartens up and stops jackassing around like this.

You'd think that all of these people - not just FM's marketing folk specifically - would wise up and start taking advantage of the Internet properly to move product. Even if they are all too stodgy to figure it out on their own, they could hire someone that does get it.

It's not just Warner that's motarded, various book publishing houses and similar insist on shooting themselves in the foot like this, too. I could tell stories about Random House and even the Quaker oats folk that would have y'all rolling your eyes like crazy.

Just wanted to say that Veoh.com is a good alternative to YT.
I have an account there. Here is a link to SB that is from the Borgata show from 6/21 show this summer.
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v14258258wadJrWRD

They won't keep us Stevie/FM fans down. It is worth a try.

Record labels plan video site
By Andrew Edgecliffe-Johnson in New York
Published: December 29 2008 02:00

A generation after the launch of MTV, the four largest record labels are hoping to revive the music video business online by creating a website grouping together all their artists' videos.

Plans under discussion include a partnership with Hulu, the online television and film joint venture between News Corp and NBC Universal; the creation of a premium service on YouTube, Google's video-sharing site; or a standalone venture between some or all of the four largest recorded music groups.

Industry members had hailed deals struck with YouTube last year as a way of driving profits from the popularity of professional music videos and from offering them as soundtracks to amateur efforts on such usergenerated content sites.

However, some are questioning whether either side has made much money from arrangements that require YouTube to share advertising revenues and, in many cases, pay a few tenths of a cent to the music company each time a video is streamed.

Universal Music, the industry leader, has said it makes "tens of millions of dollars" from YouTube.

Warner Music failed last week to agree a new deal with the site, however, saying it was not being adequately compensated and demanding that the site take down its artists' videos and amateur content using songs from its publishing arm such as "Happy Birthday To You".

Representatives of two music companies, who would not be named, said they were in discussions with Hulu. They said no announcement was imminent but that the site appeared to be the favoured partner.

Both said, however, that any deal to create a standalone music video service would not replace existing deals with YouTube and that there was interest in supplying content for a potential premium service on YouTube, which has begun to offer high-definition videos. Warner may yet return to YouTube should it agree new terms.

The industry's search for digital income comes amid collapsing compact disc sales, which have not yet been offset by digital revenue growth. Warner, the only quoted music company, reported 39 per cent growth in digital revenues for 2008 to $639m, or 18 per cent of total sales.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

I read the other day that the music companies have decided to stop suing downloaders-instead they will go to the suspected downloaders ISP's and work with them to "punish" the downloader. The article I read said that they still reserved the right to sue downloaders but the emphasis would be in "working with the ISP's" now instead. I guess this means that your ISP could drop you from their service and/or sue you instead. What a great bunch of humanitarians huh?

I seriously doubt the providers would start dropping people, they'd have no customers left and they don't want to risk it. Plus there's a privacy thing that gets involved. I don't think they will ever stop downloading... it's too common now. What I think will eventually happen is ISP's will end up going to a pay for use type of thing where limits will be put in place on the amount you can download per month and if you exceed that, you will be charged so much for it. And a portion of which will end up going to the entertainment industry to divide up... Kind of like the tax they put on blank media.

Here's a pissed off Warner Bros. artist: over the removal of their vids from youtube.


the man strikes again, youtube wars
if you hadn’t noticed, all of the dresden dolls and amanda palmer official videos have been taken off youtube.

yes, folks…girl anachronism, coin-operated boy, shores of california, almost everything from who killed amanda palmer….pretty much the whole deal.
all gone. go look for yourself.
and you ask…wtf?

basically:
“Unable to reach new licensing terms, the Warner Music Group has demanded that thousands of its videos be removed from YouTube, which is owned by Google. Warner Music’s videos, the source of a billion views on YouTube, gradually began disappearing from the site on Saturday, although many remained online Sunday evening.”

in other words, roadrunner is a subsidiary of warner and i’m stuck in hell with madonna and the other poor bastards, because warner wants more money. even worse, warner has almost no bargaining power…they’re not even in the top ten of labels who have huge artists with material streaming on youtube. they’re just starving for cash right now and they’re doing anything they can think of to come up with cash. it’s abSURD. they are looking for money in a totally backwards way.

money that, i should point out, i would NEVER see as an artist. if they got their way and youtube decided to give them a larger revenue share of the videos, it;s very unlikely it would ever make it’s way into the artists’ bank accounts.

damn, man. this **** is fu**ed UP.

i’ll obviously let you know what happens, but i’m slowly planning some sort of tribute-a-thon of dolls and amanda videos in lieu of our actual clips.

maybe a “everybody re-enact your favorite dolls video in one take on a ****ty camera, with hand puppets, for under $5” contest. maybe it will yield a masterpiece.

i loved my videos.

now they are gone.

why is life so hard?

Dear ***,
Video Disabled
A copyright owner has claimed it owns some or all of the audio content in your video Stevie Nicks - I Can't Wait (original video). The audio content identified in your video is I Can't Wait by Stevie Nicks. We regret to inform you that your video has been blocked from playback due to a music rights issue.
Replace Your Audio with AudioSwap
Don't worry, we have plenty of music available for your use. Please visit our AudioSwap library to learn how you can easily replace the audio in your video with any track from our growing library of fully licensed songs.
Other Options
If you think there's been a mistake, or you have other questions, please visit the Copyright Notice page in your account.
Sincerely,
The YouTube Content Identification Team

I noticed that they've taken down that awesome live version of Edge of Seventeen from Stevie's HBO special, but you can still watch Lindsay Lohan butchering the song on the AMAs back in 2005.

No justice in the world, I tell's ya!

I think I'd like to make an image of Ms Lohan during that version and imprint it on come toilet paper to use the next time I take a big dump.:laugh:

Oy, I hear you. I am horrified by that girl trying to do that song.

Totally no justice in the world.

apparently they are trolling their own artists...

Lindsey's "commercial" has been removed from his channel.

I'm sorry to hear this happened. So does this mean a lot of the awesome videos we watch are going to be pulled?

So silly. It's free publicity. So, they get little support from the record company and the artists then try to find a way to market themselves, but that is taken away from them too.

Michele

yeah, this makes no sense. :shrug:

youtube sux anyways :shrug:

what with the rip sites mostimes videos are captured w/ a re-up to other channels (nothing quite like 20 duplicates of the same video)...along with the f'd up tags/labeling produced by idiots.

Well, it was inevitable. They pulled my Beautiful Child/Moonlight fanvid today. Pfffttt. Warner Brothers...GET A CLUE.

I've had two of my "videos" (more like slideshows!) pulled in the past week. I'm one of those crazy bastards who still buys CDs, so I'm not sure who the hell would go out of their way to pirate audio from YouTube, when the audio quality is something like 100 kbps. :shrug: