[A2k] The Register: YouTube blocks music videos in UK

Thu Mar 12 13:27:02 2009

Thiru and all,

  What the UK seems to be requiring seems to be a blatant
violation of GATT an certainly a blatant attempt to predetermine
without verifiable facts, that Google/YouTube in engaging in
piracy.  Further from my and a number of our members reading
this seems also or additionally a likely violation of US law in
restraint of trade.  Ergo I am surprised/dismayed at Google/YouTubes
willingness to sheepishly comply pending a future agreement.

  Perhaps this could be more easily and expediently resolved if
the UK could/would provide significant proof of their claim to
the USTR and Google/YouTube.  As such, I would call British
Royalty Collectors bluff here much more publicly.

  Google will loose some creditability with it's user base on this
one, which I cannot see how they can or should afford.

Thiru Balasubramaniam wrote:

> Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/09/youtube_blocks_musi=
c_vids_in_uk/
> YouTube blocks music videos in UK
>
> Content yanksploitation against royalty collectors
>
> By Austin Modine
>
> Posted in Music and Media, 9th March 2009 22:55 GMT
>
> YouTube is blocking most of its music videos from UK viewers after
> negotiations with British royalty collectors turned sour.
>
> The Performing Rights Society (PRS) for Music, a group representing
> artists and publishers, and YouTube both blame each other entirely for
> the impasse, of course.
>
> Patrick Walker, YouTube's top pact-maker in Europe said in a blog post
> (http://www.youtube.com/blog?gl=3DGB&hl=3Den-GB&entry=3DUaUSnLJ1wWE) toda=
y
> that the site will block all "premium" music videos in the UK until it
> can strike up a new contract with PRS that is "economically
> sustainable."
>
> "But PRS is now asking us to pay many, many times more for our license
> than before," he wrote. "The costs are simply prohibitive for us -
> under PRS's proposed terms we would lose significant amounts of money
> with every playback."
>
> He also claims PRS is unwilling to even tell the video streaming site
> what songs are included in the licensing renewal being negotiated.
> Walker claims the deal is "like asking a consumer to buy an unmarked
> CD without knowing what musicians are on it."
>
> PRS appears to have been taken off guard by YouTube's sudden yanking
> of content. Shortly after the site said it's pulling UK music videos,
> PRS chief Steve Porter announced (http://www.prsformusic.com/about_us/pre=
ss/latestpressreleases/Pages/PRSforMusicStatementGoogleYouTube.aspx
> ) he was "shocked and disappointed" to receive a call late in the
> afternoon informing him of YouTube's drastic action.
>
> The music group claims YouTube wants to pay "significantly less than
> at present to the writers of the music on which their service relies,
> despite the massive increase in YouTube viewing."
>
> PRS said YouTube's decision to block music videos in the UK was done
> in the middle of licensing negotiations, and urged the site to
> reconsider "as a matter of urgency." As a jab =97 apparently to show
> that YouTube should have plenty of money to spend on fees =97 PRS noted
> the site's parent company Google made $5.7bn in revenues in the last
> quarter of 2008.
>
> The situation draws obvious parallels to how the automated streaming
> music service Pandora decided to block UK listeners (http://www.theregist=
er.co.uk/2008/01/08/pandora_uk_closes/
> ) in early 2008 because it couldn't afford a license with PRS and
> music labels. Pandora had attempted to work with copyright holders
> from the outset, as opposed to YouTube, which only more recently has
> been scoring licensing deals in an effort to generate more revenue.
>
> But YouTube is the most popular online video streaming site out there
> =97 so it certainly begs the question of who can earn enough money in
> the biz if YouTube can't?
>
> Yanking content off streaming sites appears to be an increasingly
> common negotiating ploy for both sides of the table. In December 2008,
> Warner Music Group began removing its videos from YouTube after
> claiming it wasn't getting enough cut of the profit. Apparently
> companies are betting customer outrage will spur the other side to
> bend to their demands. But when customers can get their content
> elsewhere easier (and often illegally, where nobody gets paid) the
> licensing e-tantrum can certainly backfire on both.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thiru Balasubramaniam
> Geneva Representative
> Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
> thiru@keionline.org
>
> Tel: +41 22 791 6727
> Mobile: +41 76 508 0997
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827