independent and unofficial
Prince fan community
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Is Youtube paying Prince 2 show his video's?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 3 <123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 05/12/10 8:45pm

metallicjigolo

avatar

Efan said:

Timmy84 said:



Either that or he realizes that some folks actually don't know who he is so he's gotta reintroduce himself to folks who may not know who he is. lol
[Edited 5/12/10 13:32pm]


People might remember who he was if he had been on YouTube. biggrin

Or if he didn't shit on his fans on his own website. neutral


Dude. Do you own stock in utube or something? Give it a rest.
Prince did an interview with a woman at Record World. They talked about whatever, then he asked her: "Does your pubic hair go up to your navel?" At that moment, we thought maybe we shouldn't encourage him to do interviews.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 05/13/10 3:06am

databank

avatar

Fact is that Youtube hasn't removed a Prince video -official or not- in a while. On the other hand, with all these Chinese and Korean sites (not to mention Youtube's american competitor Prince strangely never cared about) featuring Prince videos, it was quite purposeless to remove the stuff: what's removed here reappears there, it's just impossible to control the internet as a whole nowadays, so better reach an agreement and get some money...
A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...scography/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 05/13/10 7:41am

nursev

databank said:

Fact is that Youtube hasn't removed a Prince video -official or not- in a while. On the other hand, with all these Chinese and Korean sites (not to mention Youtube's american competitor Prince strangely never cared about) featuring Prince videos, it was quite purposeless to remove the stuff: what's removed here reappears there, it's just impossible to control the internet as a whole nowadays, so better reach an agreement and get some money...



very true
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 05/13/10 10:09am

Bohemian67

avatar

Obviously some deal has been reached and it's win/win situation for everybody. Lotusflower closed and the doors to youtube opened. No streaming problems, I've heard more than I could ever have dreamed of and it's like a jungle out there now. I like it! razz
"Free URself, B the best that U can B, 3rd Apartment from the Sun, nothing left to fear" Prince Rogers Nelson - Forever in my Life -
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 05/13/10 2:53pm

minneapolisFun
q

avatar

This is false.

If you upload a Prince song WMG will file a report and try to get the music removed from the video.



Luckily under the fair use agreement they are legally restricted from taking action as long as you follow the guidelines and showcase a disclaimer in the video information.
You're so glam, every time I see you I wanna slam!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 05/13/10 4:27pm

databank

avatar

minneapolisFunq said:

This is false.

If you upload a Prince song WMG will file a report and try to get the music removed from the video.



Luckily under the fair use agreement they are legally restricted from taking action as long as you follow the guidelines and showcase a disclaimer in the video information.


WMG or UMG? Universal was taking it out on behalf of Prince, not Warner. If Warner removes some stuff it's because they haven't reached an agreement, not because they were commissionned by Prince. I really don't know, maybe tomorrow all Prince vids will have disappeared as far as i know, but fact is that there are more & more lately. Now if Swami benefits from Youtube lately, i guess more or less every one does. This wouldn't allow posting of boots, though.
A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...scography/
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 05/14/10 2:04pm

minneapolisFun
q

avatar

databank said:

minneapolisFunq said:

This is false.

If you upload a Prince song WMG will file a report and try to get the music removed from the video.



Luckily under the fair use agreement they are legally restricted from taking action as long as you follow the guidelines and showcase a disclaimer in the video information.


WMG or UMG? Universal was taking it out on behalf of Prince, not Warner. If Warner removes some stuff it's because they haven't reached an agreement, not because they were commissionned by Prince. I really don't know, maybe tomorrow all Prince vids will have disappeared as far as i know, but fact is that there are more & more lately. Now if Swami benefits from Youtube lately, i guess more or less every one does. This wouldn't allow posting of boots, though.



Its because people are learning about the fair use agreement.

Prince himself has nothing to do with taking down songs on youtube, thats why bootlegs usually stand the test of time.

Officially released music gets cracked down on because of the record labels who own it.
You're so glam, every time I see you I wanna slam!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 05/14/10 2:30pm

JoeTyler

[Please do not post any Prince/Assoc. Artists videos from sites such as YouTube, MySpace etc. This is strictly prohibited for legal reasons, and we ask that all Org members please respect this. Note: Violating posts will be removed. 'Repeat offender' accounts will be deleted - permanently. You have been warned! The same goes for fake tracklists, attention-seeking 'rumor' threads etc - don't! - No, the mention of youtube does not change the rules of this site. - Mars23]
tinkerbell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 05/14/10 5:54pm

Christopher

avatar

Militant said:

7souls said:

A more logical solution would be for the people that go to Youtube and want to see a Prince video to have to pay per play. You go there to sample a small clip of what they have. Then if you see something you want to watch in full, then the viewer, not the hosting web site, should pay to view it. That way all the people that feel that Prince should be paid every single time anyone sees his videos, can rest assured that each person has compensated him fairly. Youtube could have a free content section and an "Artists wanting payment" section.


This is sort of happening. Or will be, soon. YouTube recently announced they'll be starting a "rentals" program. My thought was that it'd mostly be for full-length movies, TV shows, things like that, but I guess it's possible some artists might want to use that system for music videos too. Although I believe the majority of artists will continue with the current method - the same we we have done for videos being shown on TV channels for years. As long as we get the appropriate royalty cut, it's all good.

Christopher said:


offical videos arent even on there but other stuff is? what gives


That "other stuff" you speak of isn't officially sanctioned. If Prince was still utilizing the services of Web Sheriff, that stuff would have been removed long ago.

At the moment, there's no official Prince stuff on YouTube, but he's not aggressively hiring companies like Web Sheriff to pull anything and everything either. There could be any number of reasons why he's not. Maybe he'll never do an official YouTube channel of his own with official stuff on it. We just don't know at this stage.

The closest thing to officially sanctioned Prince stuff on YouTube were those videos shelbey posted recently. Evidently, she was asked by someone working for Prince to put those particular Montreaux clips up.

The most likely scenario, is that Prince just has no interest in doing anything official with that archive material at this stage. Same reason that there aren't any re-releases or digital remasters of the WB material.



still gonna watch them free videos smile
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 05/14/10 7:52pm

Efan

avatar

JoeTyler said:

[Please do not post any Prince/Assoc. Artists videos from sites such as YouTube, MySpace etc. This is strictly prohibited for legal reasons, and we ask that all Org members please respect this. Note: Violating posts will be removed. 'Repeat offender' accounts will be deleted - permanently. You have been warned! The same goes for fake tracklists, attention-seeking 'rumor' threads etc - don't! - No, the mention of youtube does not change the rules of this site. - Mars23]


Christ almighty. White people really cannot clap on the beat, can they?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 05/14/10 8:49pm

HatrinaHaterwi
tz

avatar

Joined: June 23, 2006


That's when I joined Youtube! There were just a little over 1500 videos on Youtube at that time. I'VE witnessed ALL of Youtube's growth and development, firsthand! nod

Prince can try and spin it...any damn way he wants to but I've been suspecting that he CAVED for quite some time! hmmm

NOW...I KNOW...he HAS! End of story! evillol

The only question is...WHEN...we can start posting Prince Youtube's...on HERE? wink
I knew from the start that I loved you with all my heart.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 05/15/10 5:27am

muleFunk

avatar

Militant said:

ernestsewell said:

It'd be ridiculous and ass-backwards for them to pay Prince or any artist to allow their videos on the site.


Why? They pay me. Just like every other radio station and TV channel that plays my songs and videos. That's how it works.

YouTube (like all of Google's products) make money through advertising. People pay for that advertising based upon how much exposure they will get from it. So popular content generates a lot of revenue, a chunk of which goes to the creator of that content. It's not like they're using some magical new method of making money that nobody has thought of before.

The issue before was that it wasn't clear what artists were making. That's why Prince didn't want his content on there. Since then, YouTube have struck and are constantly renegotiating deals with the royalty collections agencies - folks like ASCAP in the US, PRS in the UK, etc.


Please continue to explain to people that this is a business and placing content without giving proper compensation is stealing.
This is really hurting artists and driving up the costs for things like concerts.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 05/15/10 6:20am

m3taverse

If "unprecedented" means that hundreds of thousands of rights holders currently have deals in place with Google to get payed for traffic towards their property, they yeah, this certainly is unprecedented.
"this especially prepared potato is called pomme de terre"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 05/15/10 7:15am

JoeTyler

Efan said:

JoeTyler said:

[Please do not post any Prince/Assoc. Artists videos from sites such as YouTube, MySpace etc. This is strictly prohibited for legal reasons, and we ask that all Org members please respect this. Note: Violating posts will be removed. 'Repeat offender' accounts will be deleted - permanently. You have been warned! The same goes for fake tracklists, attention-seeking 'rumor' threads etc - don't! - No, the mention of youtube does not change the rules of this site. - Mars23]


Christ almighty. White people really cannot clap on the beat, can they?



yeah lol
tinkerbell
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 05/16/10 12:12am

Astasheiks

avatar

Graycap23 said:

If this rumor is true, it is unprecedented.

We are hearing rumors that Youtube is now paying Prince to have his music on their site.

Prince, a long standing opponent of youtube, may have finally reached an agreement with the popular video web site. Lately, Prince’s latest videos and songs have been getting posted on youtube (but wanting the videos not to be posted elsewhere and has disabled the embed code to post on various web sites.) So he may be easing off on them.


http://www.drfunkenberry....umor-mill/


Well Well
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 05/16/10 7:55am

Mindflux

avatar

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

Joined: June 23, 2006


That's when I joined Youtube! There were just a little over 1500 videos on Youtube at that time. I'VE witnessed ALL of Youtube's growth and development, firsthand! nod

Prince can try and spin it...any damn way he wants to but I've been suspecting that he CAVED for quite some time! hmmm

NOW...I KNOW...he HAS! End of story! evillol

The only question is...WHEN...we can start posting Prince Youtube's...on HERE? wink


He didn't "cave" - he WON! End of story wink (However, I have to add that I'm not sure Prince was singularly responsible for this - many artists have been fighting for these rights for a while. Certainly in the UK, the Performing Rights Society has been very proactive on behalf of its members in procuring s deal with YouTube and others).

Like most other artists, we finally got some reward for our efforts. Its still crazy though, I can't think of many other careers where you have to fight for rightful reimbursement! And that stealing is so endorsed by many - even around here. How can anyone, even on this thread, think that its WRONG to be paid for your own work to be used - its insane!
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 05/16/10 8:59am

piepie1976

Efan said:

JoeTyler said:

[Please do not post any Prince/Assoc. Artists videos from sites such as YouTube, MySpace etc. This is strictly prohibited for legal reasons, and we ask that all Org members please respect this. Note: Violating posts will be removed. 'Repeat offender' accounts will be deleted - permanently. You have been warned! The same goes for fake tracklists, attention-seeking 'rumor' threads etc - don't! - No, the mention of youtube does not change the rules of this site. - Mars23]


Christ almighty. White people really cannot clap on the beat, can they?


White people and Oprah basically.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 05/16/10 10:09am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

This is total conjecture that funkenberry came up with in 2009. It in no way changes the rules of this site and there is no indicator that it is true in any way.
Studies have shown the ass crack of the average Prince fan to be abnormally large. This explains the ease and frequency of their panties bunching up in it.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 05/16/10 11:19am

vinx98

avatar

its typical of prince, instead of making good music that people want to buy (apart from his core fan base), he looks for third party sources of income and is being very creative in his pursuits. so instead of using his great creativity to make music, he's using his energy to do crap like this.

if this business model is successful, he will detroy youtube, every artist will demand payment for their material and that will be the end of youtube. once it is no longer free, it will be useless and something else will come along that is free and people will jump onto that.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 05/16/10 6:51pm

aarontj

Militant said:

Christopher said:


i read it,homie.


So can you tell me what's wrong with YouTube paying Prince, then? Or any other artist, for that matter?

Is it wrong that artists should be paid for their content?

We watch "free videos" on YouTube in the same way that we watch "free shows" on TV. Should MTV not pay artists either?
[Edited 5/12/10 13:15pm]



You are so right Militant, recording artists deserve to be pay even by radio stations, great comments!
"I have so much love for Prince. But why don't they look at me that way"- MJ
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 05/17/10 6:15am

Mindflux

avatar

vinx98 said:

its typical of prince, instead of making good music that people want to buy (apart from his core fan base), he looks for third party sources of income and is being very creative in his pursuits. so instead of using his great creativity to make music, he's using his energy to do crap like this.

if this business model is successful, he will detroy youtube, every artist will demand payment for their material and that will be the end of youtube. once it is no longer free, it will be useless and something else will come along that is free and people will jump onto that.


Eh?

He is still using his energy to make music - what are you talking about? And its not like he's stopped making music and is now looking at other methods of milking income from somewhere. All he is doing is ensuring he gets paid for any of his work that is used - what's wrong with that?

He won't destroy YouTube and bear in mind that YouTube was not created as a means of watching copyrighted material for free!! It has become that. Initially, it was a way for YOU to get YOUR stuff online easliy - hence, why it is called YOUTUBE! And, if it does get "destroyed" then good I say - they should have respected copyright owners from the outset (or, at least, the users should, before anyone says, "but its not youtube, its the people who upload it"). rolleyes

You have to realise that this is a very difficult battle for artists and one which may not be won - but, does that mean we shouldn't fight?

Your comments clearly come from someone who doesn't sell their own product, run a business, or do anything creatively that can be used to generate income. Completely naive and misguided.
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 05/17/10 6:22am

Mindflux

avatar

TheVoid said:

By allowing his videos to be watched on youtube, what Prince is getting paid by youtube will be nothing compared to the advertising such videos will do for him. For all his douchbaggery, he's a stellar performer and electrifying presence on screen (when he's singing and dancing).


Can't remember if it was you I went down this road with before, but you have no evidence to support that statement whatsoever.

Give me one example, just one (other than the Chris Brown anomaly) of an artist who has had success from youtube, whether it has "broken" a new artist and given them success, or a well-established act who has seen their sales soar because of YouTube. Just one!
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 05/17/10 6:33am

Mindflux

avatar

Christopher said:

Militant said:



So can you tell me what's wrong with YouTube paying Prince, then? Or any other artist, for that matter?

Is it wrong that artists should be paid for their content?

We watch "free videos" on YouTube in the same way that we watch "free shows" on TV. Should MTV not pay artists either?
[Edited 5/12/10 13:15pm]


point is he's too controlling with such things as evident with all his previous woe's with fan's and fan sites.so its a tad ridic it has to be this long and drawn out.the offical videos arent even on there but other stuff is? what gives


Nonsense. How can an artist be "too controlling" over what is theirs? They either have a say about their product, or they don't. It is THEIR right to do with their music what they please, surely?

And, historically, artists have very little control over their product - the major labels in particular ensure that they call the shots. Exactly the same thing happened to Frank Zappa as did to Prince - oh, and guess who the label was.....Warner Brothers!

"While 1971 ended with physical disaster, 1977 saw the start of litigational warfare, with Zappa's main business associates becoming his enemies. The relationship with his record company Warner Brothers had become under strain and Zappa wanted to end his contractual obligations by delivering the tapes for the four records he was still due at once. But Warner Bros. refused to pay the agreed advances for these records at one time, nor did they set off releasing them in time. A lasting lawsuit followed, interacting with the running lawsuit about Discreet with Cohen, since Discreet was a label of Warner Bros.
Subsequently Zappa went negotiating a new contract for releasing this material, now in the form of a four record set called "Läther". In October 1977, when the first "Läther" boxes already had been pressed, Warner Bros. decided to release the material handed over to them anyway as the originally planned individual records, one live album "Zappa in New York", and three studio albums "Studio Tan", "Sleep Dirt" and "Orchestral Favourites". For "Zappa in New York" Zappa had handed over the material for the album cover, but there was no cooperation whatsoever for the studio albums. They were released in a sloppy way with low budget cartoon covers and no promotion. It enraged Zappa and he publicly uttered his anger with setting up a "Warner Bros. sucks" banner on stage and stating the same on record. Squeezing out a contract once the relationship is ended is regrettably common practice in rock business though and things far worse have happened to other artists. In 1997 the "Läther" version collection was released on three CDs. Unfortunately these issues don't overlap for 100%, so you still have to buy them both to be complete. The lawsuits were mainly settled behind closed doors, when Zappa was given the opportunity to buy the copyrights from Warner Bros. and the mastertapes of his recordings were handed over to him in 1982. It led to a unique situation, where a well-known rock musician became completely in control over his business." (taken from http://www.zappa-analysis.com/irr.htm)

Sound at all familiar?

So, how do you, as a consumer, justify claiming that any artist could be "too controlling" of their product, when the control they ought to have is often wrestled away immediately? And how do you justify your apparent right to have access to any material you want, when you want it, without compensating the creator of the work? Its entirely ludicrous and unjustifiable!
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 05/17/10 7:12am

Efan

avatar

Mindflux said:

TheVoid said:

By allowing his videos to be watched on youtube, what Prince is getting paid by youtube will be nothing compared to the advertising such videos will do for him. For all his douchbaggery, he's a stellar performer and electrifying presence on screen (when he's singing and dancing).


Can't remember if it was you I went down this road with before, but you have no evidence to support that statement whatsoever.

Give me one example, just one (other than the Chris Brown anomaly) of an artist who has had success from youtube, whether it has "broken" a new artist and given them success, or a well-established act who has seen their sales soar because of YouTube. Just one!


Justin Bieber
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 05/17/10 7:20am

Mindflux

avatar

Efan said:

Mindflux said:



Can't remember if it was you I went down this road with before, but you have no evidence to support that statement whatsoever.

Give me one example, just one (other than the Chris Brown anomaly) of an artist who has had success from youtube, whether it has "broken" a new artist and given them success, or a well-established act who has seen their sales soar because of YouTube. Just one!


Justin Bieber


Good effort, but not quite. He was seen on YouTube by someone who then became his manager who then broke him in the business. That's not the same as the "publicity" from YouTube creating an artist. If an A&R man spots someone in a club, is it the club that made them famous, or the man who found them?

Even if we take your example and include Chris Brown, we have 2 examples. Now, how many millions of videos have been uploaded to YouTube in the past 5 years and how many billions of views have their been? You see what I'm getting at? This apparently great "promotional tool" has had 2 in a million(s) success stories - go to any business or advertising agency with those sorts of odds on success and be prepared to be laughed out of the building!
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 05/17/10 7:23am

vinx98

avatar

Mindflux said:

vinx98 said:

its typical of prince, instead of making good music that people want to buy (apart from his core fan base), he looks for third party sources of income and is being very creative in his pursuits. so instead of using his great creativity to make music, he's using his energy to do crap like this.

if this business model is successful, he will detroy youtube, every artist will demand payment for their material and that will be the end of youtube. once it is no longer free, it will be useless and something else will come along that is free and people will jump onto that.


Eh?

He is still using his energy to make music - what are you talking about? And its not like he's stopped making music and is now looking at other methods of milking income from somewhere. All he is doing is ensuring he gets paid for any of his work that is used - what's wrong with that?

He won't destroy YouTube and bear in mind that YouTube was not created as a means of watching copyrighted material for free!! It has become that. Initially, it was a way for YOU to get YOUR stuff online easliy - hence, why it is called YOUTUBE! And, if it does get "destroyed" then good I say - they should have respected copyright owners from the outset (or, at least, the users should, before anyone says, "but its not youtube, its the people who upload it"). rolleyes

You have to realise that this is a very difficult battle for artists and one which may not be won - but, does that mean we shouldn't fight?

Your comments clearly come from someone who doesn't sell their own product, run a business, or do anything creatively that can be used to generate income. Completely naive and misguided.


All i said was that prince spends his energy on this sort of stuff when it could be better channeled into making good music, hence the degradation in the quality of his music in recent times.

In addition, i am taking the point of view of a consumer of prince's music, as a musician, i could tell you a different story, i would love millions of people to watch my videos on youtube for free as it would give me great exposure. many musicians, artists and other people's careers are being launched on youtube because of viral marketing. I would say that youtube is the equivalent of getting your music played on radio - that sort of exposure sells records.

prince complains that his music isnt getting played on radio, or at least he doesnt seem to understand why (see Tavis Smiley interview). The business has changed, here he has a chance to get exposure - to get millions of people to watch chocolate box video, but no - he wants to get paid. No one will pay. The success of the internet is based on free material for all. If youtube start charging, then other greedy artists will start requesting that their music videos should have a "price". Henceforth after that, youtube will be un-usuable (see Napster) and someone else will come along and offer his videos for free..

Prince spends too much time thinking about this - he thinks he deserves to get "paid", but its only his hard core that will pay, and as we have learned from Lotusflower, he will suck money out of you and give you little in return. And people call him a "pioneed" in internet music business - that's laughable - after lotusflower, i cannot see anyone else wanting to buy his crappy web product again, unless he waits, say 4-5 years when people start forgetting how sh1t lotusflower was.

Your last personal attack on me, saying i am naive is laughable as you dont know me. It appears from your comment that you have no business sense at all and that greed is your main motivator in life as well - letting people watch your videos for free is a great way to sell records. When KISS and Raspberry Beret came out in the 80's I saw the video clips on tv (for free) loved the songs and bought them -now Prince is suffocating himself business wise as he is closing all avenues of promotion for his music because he thinks he's right and then complains when no one (outside his hardcode fan base) gives two tosses about his music anymore. In fact he's even starting to attack his hard core base of fans for criticising his methods. I mean the guy is a hard headed business person who has very strict point of view when it comes to business. But it's all wrong, and he has such a high opinion of his own decisions that he is inflexible and wont change - his mainstream music career is dead and people only care about the old songs - let people see it for free, maybe a new set of fans will appear accross the horizon and listen to his new stuff (and make a purchase here or there).

Did you pay for the lotusflower subscription? There were videos on there, but nothing I want to see - its all the stuff prince wants you to see. Its about control, of his fan base, of what people listen to - to control you as a consumer of his product. But the reality is he has no idea - fans do what they want, they cannot be controlled (to an extent) and they can recognise sh1t music - they can recognise that they are being ripped off.

This is not about YOU the business man, its about us, the consumers. We have been fed inferior product and ripped off for ages. Its greedy business men like you that make consumers angry and rebel. We dont want to be seen as dollar notes, we want to see an old video of Prince on youtube thats all.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 05/17/10 7:36am

Efan

avatar

Mindflux said:

Efan said:



Justin Bieber


Good effort, but not quite. He was seen on YouTube by someone who then became his manager who then broke him in the business. That's not the same as the "publicity" from YouTube creating an artist. If an A&R man spots someone in a club, is it the club that made them famous, or the man who found them?

Even if we take your example and include Chris Brown, we have 2 examples. Now, how many millions of videos have been uploaded to YouTube in the past 5 years and how many billions of views have their been? You see what I'm getting at? This apparently great "promotional tool" has had 2 in a million(s) success stories - go to any business or advertising agency with those sorts of odds on success and be prepared to be laughed out of the building!


This is a strange argument you're making. Yes, there are millions of videos on YouTube. Most of them are random best-man speeches at weddings and "hilarious" mishaps and whatnot. And then there are the things that go viral. Like, say, an OK Go video.

Saying it's two in a million is a little off. Truth be told, I think YouTube is responsible for a lot of crap (e.g., that "Leave Britney alone!" freak getting a deal from his YouTube video). But many people have used it creatively to get money, fame, attention, or whatever.

Your A&R point doesn't make sense to me, to be honest.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 05/17/10 7:44am

Mindflux

avatar

vinx98 said:

Mindflux said:



Eh?

He is still using his energy to make music - what are you talking about? And its not like he's stopped making music and is now looking at other methods of milking income from somewhere. All he is doing is ensuring he gets paid for any of his work that is used - what's wrong with that?

He won't destroy YouTube and bear in mind that YouTube was not created as a means of watching copyrighted material for free!! It has become that. Initially, it was a way for YOU to get YOUR stuff online easliy - hence, why it is called YOUTUBE! And, if it does get "destroyed" then good I say - they should have respected copyright owners from the outset (or, at least, the users should, before anyone says, "but its not youtube, its the people who upload it"). rolleyes

You have to realise that this is a very difficult battle for artists and one which may not be won - but, does that mean we shouldn't fight?

Your comments clearly come from someone who doesn't sell their own product, run a business, or do anything creatively that can be used to generate income. Completely naive and misguided.


All i said was that prince spends his energy on this sort of stuff when it could be better channeled into making good music, hence the degradation in the quality of his music in recent times.

In addition, i am taking the point of view of a consumer of prince's music, as a musician, i could tell you a different story, i would love millions of people to watch my videos on youtube for free as it would give me great exposure. many musicians, artists and other people's careers are being launched on youtube because of viral marketing. I would say that youtube is the equivalent of getting your music played on radio - that sort of exposure sells records.

prince complains that his music isnt getting played on radio, or at least he doesnt seem to understand why (see Tavis Smiley interview). The business has changed, here he has a chance to get exposure - to get millions of people to watch chocolate box video, but no - he wants to get paid. No one will pay. The success of the internet is based on free material for all. If youtube start charging, then other greedy artists will start requesting that their music videos should have a "price". Henceforth after that, youtube will be un-usuable (see Napster) and someone else will come along and offer his videos for free..

Prince spends too much time thinking about this - he thinks he deserves to get "paid", but its only his hard core that will pay, and as we have learned from Lotusflower, he will suck money out of you and give you little in return. And people call him a "pioneed" in internet music business - that's laughable - after lotusflower, i cannot see anyone else wanting to buy his crappy web product again, unless he waits, say 4-5 years when people start forgetting how sh1t lotusflower was.

Your last personal attack on me, saying i am naive is laughable as you dont know me. It appears from your comment that you have no business sense at all and that greed is your main motivator in life as well - letting people watch your videos for free is a great way to sell records. When KISS and Raspberry Beret came out in the 80's I saw the video clips on tv (for free) loved the songs and bought them -now Prince is suffocating himself business wise as he is closing all avenues of promotion for his music because he thinks he's right and then complains when no one (outside his hardcode fan base) gives two tosses about his music anymore. In fact he's even starting to attack his hard core base of fans for criticising his methods. I mean the guy is a hard headed business person who has very strict point of view when it comes to business. But it's all wrong, and he has such a high opinion of his own decisions that he is inflexible and wont change - his mainstream music career is dead and people only care about the old songs - let people see it for free, maybe a new set of fans will appear accross the horizon and listen to his new stuff (and make a purchase here or there).

Did you pay for the lotusflower subscription? There were videos on there, but nothing I want to see - its all the stuff prince wants you to see. Its about control, of his fan base, of what people listen to - to control you as a consumer of his product. But the reality is he has no idea - fans do what they want, they cannot be controlled (to an extent) and they can recognise sh1t music - they can recognise that they are being ripped off.

This is not about YOU the business man, its about us, the consumers. We have been fed inferior product and ripped off for ages. Its greedy business men like you that make consumers angry and rebel. We dont want to be seen as dollar notes, we want to see an old video of Prince on youtube thats all.


Ok, there's a lot wrong here, so here goes;

I disagree that he is wasting his time. Your opinion is that his music is suffering because of his efforts to protect his music. That's just your opinion and I don't agree with it. I also think it is important for an artist to protect their work.

You appear to imply that you are an artist yourself who would benefit from the promotion on YouTube. Is that the case? If it is, you have a lot to learn about the industry (which would support my "naive" comment!). I am a signed recording artist and music producer (so your businessman comment motivated by greed is WAY OFF the mark! I am interested in creating music and being paid fairly. If I was motivated by money, I wouldn't be making music that isn't mainstream - I'd be producing generic pop and chasing that money. Instead, I make music I like and hope that enough people like it AND purchase it so I can make a living, which I just about do).

Your ending comment of " I would say that youtube is the equivalent of getting your music played on radio - that sort of exposure sells records" further displays your naivety! It is NOT the same at all. Radio PAYS for the right to broadcast your tune, YouTube does not. Which is the essence of this entire argument, yes?

"Prince complains that his music isn't played on the radio" - well, no he doesn't. He took himself out of that business years ago - that was a personal decision in reponse to what he sees is wrong with the record industry. Instead of remaining a slave to the status quo (like Madonna, for example), he took the braver decision to go it alone. For most, that would be end of career. He may have complained about the way radio operates and why they might play your music (major label influence etc) but that's a cry against the system.

"Prince spends too much time thinking about this - he thinks he deserves to get "paid", but its only his hard core that will pay" - this, again, is just rubbish. He's not asking the consumer to pay in this case, he is asking the people who broadcast his material. EVERYONE else who broadcasts copyrighted material has to pay a licence fee - why should it be any different for YouTube?

You then go on to get upset about my "personal attack" - that's not an attack, its an observation and you make it even clearer that you really don't know what you are talking about. You might have seen stuff on MTV for free (although, surely you pay for your cable channels, right?), but MTV still had to pay for the right to broadcast the material! Just like if you listened to it on radio (and even that's not free, well not in the UK - anyone who owns a TV or radio in the UK has to pay a "licence fee" for the right to listen to the broadcasts), it still wasn't "free" because the radio stations still, RIGHTLY, compensate the songwriter.

His mainstream music career is not "dead" - dead mainstream artists don't get asked to play the SuperBowl, do they? Or BRIT awards? Just because he doesn't have hit singles anymore doesn't mean his career is dead!

Music is how I make my living, so I do know a thing or two about this - what do you do?
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 05/17/10 7:47am

Mindflux

avatar

Efan said:

Mindflux said:



Good effort, but not quite. He was seen on YouTube by someone who then became his manager who then broke him in the business. That's not the same as the "publicity" from YouTube creating an artist. If an A&R man spots someone in a club, is it the club that made them famous, or the man who found them?

Even if we take your example and include Chris Brown, we have 2 examples. Now, how many millions of videos have been uploaded to YouTube in the past 5 years and how many billions of views have their been? You see what I'm getting at? This apparently great "promotional tool" has had 2 in a million(s) success stories - go to any business or advertising agency with those sorts of odds on success and be prepared to be laughed out of the building!


This is a strange argument you're making. Yes, there are millions of videos on YouTube. Most of them are random best-man speeches at weddings and "hilarious" mishaps and whatnot. And then there are the things that go viral. Like, say, an OK Go video.

Saying it's two in a million is a little off. Truth be told, I think YouTube is responsible for a lot of crap (e.g., that "Leave Britney alone!" freak getting a deal from his YouTube video). But many people have used it creatively to get money, fame, attention, or whatever.

Your A&R point doesn't make sense to me, to be honest.


Meaning that YouTube wasn't what made Beiber a success, it was a canny A&R man.

And, its not a "strange argument" - YouTube has no record of success as a promotional tool for people, that is my point. Nobody has built a career of the back of YouTube. That may change but, in 5 years and millions of uploads, the evidence so far is that YouTube is not the way you are going to "make it".
...we have only scratched the surface of what the mind can do...

My dance project;
www.zubzub.co.uk

Listen to any of my tracks in full, for free, here;
www.zubzub.bandcamp.com

Go and glisten wink
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 05/17/10 7:58am

Efan

avatar

Mindflux said:

Efan said:



This is a strange argument you're making. Yes, there are millions of videos on YouTube. Most of them are random best-man speeches at weddings and "hilarious" mishaps and whatnot. And then there are the things that go viral. Like, say, an OK Go video.

Saying it's two in a million is a little off. Truth be told, I think YouTube is responsible for a lot of crap (e.g., that "Leave Britney alone!" freak getting a deal from his YouTube video). But many people have used it creatively to get money, fame, attention, or whatever.

Your A&R point doesn't make sense to me, to be honest.


Meaning that YouTube wasn't what made Beiber a success, it was a canny A&R man.

And, its not a "strange argument" - YouTube has no record of success as a promotional tool for people, that is my point. Nobody has built a career of the back of YouTube. That may change but, in 5 years and millions of uploads, the evidence so far is that YouTube is not the way you are going to "make it".


Yeah, but the point is that he used YouTube to get to the A&R man. Whether you're using a club or the Internet or some other method to get yourself and/or your art out there, it's still an important and effective tool.

Susan Boyle would be another example of someone whose success came about because of YouTube. Of course she had to do something after YouTube--like putting out an album that people paid for--but the success began with YouTube.

Comparing it to a club that an unknown act uses to get noticed by a record company--that's fine. Clubs are important, right? They're all a part of the process. I don't think it lessens its value.

I'm not arguing that it's not right for Prince to be paid by YouTube. That's great that he is. Very cool. But I think he has a backward and shortsighted approach to the Internet as a whole, especially including YouTube--as evidenced by his suing a dancing baby.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 3 <123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Is Youtube paying Prince 2 show his video's?