hideyoursheep
12-21-2008, 06:04 AM
:(
Warner Music Corp.'s videos and songs began disappearing from the YouTube videosharing Web site early Saturday after talks to renegotiate a licensing deal stalled.
It isn't clear whether the decision to remove the content was made by Warner Music or YouTube. But regardless, the dispute may indicate the start of a broader dispute between YouTube and the music industry over the value of music content on the site.
Warner, like the three other major-label groups, licensed its recording and music-publishing catalogs to YouTube shortly before the site's acquisition by Google Inc. in 2006. In exchange for the use of their music videos and songs, the music companies are paid a share of revenue generated by ads displayed alongside both their content and user-generated content that contains their music.
People in the music industry generally say that music videos don't command significant advertising fees online, and Warner executives have privately expressed frustration with the amount of money they receive from YouTube.
In theory, the new development means that YouTube users cannot view music videos by Warner artists, including Led Zeppelin, Aretha Franklin and Linkin Park. It also means that any video -- even one that is homemade -- that features music by a Warner artist, or written by a songwriter published by Warner/Chappell Music Publishing, won't be available, either.
As of midday Saturday, however, many Warner music videos remained on YouTube.
Warner's record labels, including Atlantic Records and Warner Bros., have 21% of the U.S. recorded music market. Warner/Chappell is the third-largest music publisher in the U.S.
All four major music companies' licenses are up for renewal in March 2009, and all are in the midst of renegotiating. It is not clear whether the other majors -- Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, Sony Corp.'s Sony BMG Music Entertainment and EMI Group Ltd. -- could reach similar impasses.
A Warner spokesman said in a statement: "We are working actively to find a resolution with YouTube that would enable the return of our artists' content to the site. Until then, we simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters, labels and publishers for the value they provide."
A posting on YouTube's company blog left open the possibility that the videosharing site, not Warner, had made the decision to pull the content. "Sometimes, if we can't reach acceptable business terms, we must part ways with successful partners," the posting read in part. "For example, you may notice videos that contain music owned by Warner Music Group being blocked from the site."
The disagreement suggests that despite YouTube's enormous audience, it is still struggling to sell enough advertising to satisfy its partners. Google has made earning more revenue from YouTube one of its top priorities this year, launching a number of new ways to advertise on the site.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122980193788724073.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Warner Music Corp.'s videos and songs began disappearing from the YouTube videosharing Web site early Saturday after talks to renegotiate a licensing deal stalled.
It isn't clear whether the decision to remove the content was made by Warner Music or YouTube. But regardless, the dispute may indicate the start of a broader dispute between YouTube and the music industry over the value of music content on the site.
Warner, like the three other major-label groups, licensed its recording and music-publishing catalogs to YouTube shortly before the site's acquisition by Google Inc. in 2006. In exchange for the use of their music videos and songs, the music companies are paid a share of revenue generated by ads displayed alongside both their content and user-generated content that contains their music.
People in the music industry generally say that music videos don't command significant advertising fees online, and Warner executives have privately expressed frustration with the amount of money they receive from YouTube.
In theory, the new development means that YouTube users cannot view music videos by Warner artists, including Led Zeppelin, Aretha Franklin and Linkin Park. It also means that any video -- even one that is homemade -- that features music by a Warner artist, or written by a songwriter published by Warner/Chappell Music Publishing, won't be available, either.
As of midday Saturday, however, many Warner music videos remained on YouTube.
Warner's record labels, including Atlantic Records and Warner Bros., have 21% of the U.S. recorded music market. Warner/Chappell is the third-largest music publisher in the U.S.
All four major music companies' licenses are up for renewal in March 2009, and all are in the midst of renegotiating. It is not clear whether the other majors -- Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, Sony Corp.'s Sony BMG Music Entertainment and EMI Group Ltd. -- could reach similar impasses.
A Warner spokesman said in a statement: "We are working actively to find a resolution with YouTube that would enable the return of our artists' content to the site. Until then, we simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters, labels and publishers for the value they provide."
A posting on YouTube's company blog left open the possibility that the videosharing site, not Warner, had made the decision to pull the content. "Sometimes, if we can't reach acceptable business terms, we must part ways with successful partners," the posting read in part. "For example, you may notice videos that contain music owned by Warner Music Group being blocked from the site."
The disagreement suggests that despite YouTube's enormous audience, it is still struggling to sell enough advertising to satisfy its partners. Google has made earning more revenue from YouTube one of its top priorities this year, launching a number of new ways to advertise on the site.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122980193788724073.html?mod=googlenews_wsj