Warner Music Group has struck a licensing deal with Google for two music services the technology giant is launching later this summer, according to executives familiar with the agreement. Google will offer two distinct subscription services – one through its YouTube online video property and another via its Google Play platform.

Executives at Warner, which is the first record label to commit to Google’s proposed music service, declined to comment. A YouTube spokesman issued the following statement: “While we don't comment on rumor or speculation, there are some content creators that think they would benefit from a subscription revenue stream in addition to ads, so we're looking at that.”

Google is also in deep negotiations with Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and other labels to nail down an agreement similar to the one it now has with Warner.

Google In Talks For Music Streaming Service

Google’s efforts to build an on-demand music service was first reported in February by the Financial Times. Fortune followed up with a report that detailed Google’s plans for two separate music services.

Google will be jumping into a fiercely fought market for on-demand music streaming. Spotify, Rhapsody, Muve Music, Slacker, Samsung Music Hub, Sony Music Unlimited and Rdio are among the current players slugging it out for dominance. And later this summer, Beats Electronics will re-launch a revamped MOG service, branded as Beats Music.

Google, however, will be coming to the party with several formidable advantages – YouTube and Android.

Its YouTube platform attracts 800 million unique viewers a month. That’s vastly more than the tens of millions of people worldwide who are estimated to be using on-demand streaming music services -- both free and paid. In addition, Google’s Android operating system powered 68.4% of all smartphones shipped globally in 2012, compared with 19.4% for Apple’s iOS, according to Strategy Analytics.

Under current plans, which could change as Google firms up its strategy, the Mountain View, Calif., technology giant will offer an ad-free subscription tier for YouTube viewers. In addition, it would offer another service from its Google Play platform, which currently sells song downloads similar to Apple’s iTunes and has a free scan-and-match locker service that lets users stream songs from their music library via any Internet connection. Subscribing to a Google Play music service would give listeners access to licensed songs that they don’t own, according to executives knowledgeable with the plans but who are not allowed to speak publicly on behalf of Google.

Warner has historically marched to its own tune when it comes to building a digital strategy. The label declined to join Universal and Sony in creating VEVO, a music video network that has had massive success on YouTube. Instead, Warner created its own YouTube channel – The Warner Sound, which features music videos from Warner’s own artists and has consistently ranked among the top 5 most popular YouTube Partner channels, according to comScore Inc. The company, whose digital strategy is shaped by longtime Warner executive Stephen Bryan, also held out for almost a year after rival record companies signed deals to sell downloads on Google’s music store, launched in 2011.

Bryan, who led Warner’s negotiations with Google for the upcoming music services, declined through a spokesman to comment for this story.

For labels, which have long since moved beyond initial fears that on-demand services could cannibalize music sales, the proliferation of music services is a welcomed development. Many executives who have spoken with Billboard.biz have pointed to the recent report from the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry showing an overall growth in music revenue for the first time since 1999. The IFPI credited much of that increase to the flowering of digital music services, which now number some 500 worldwide, covering 100 global markets, up from just 23 a year ago.

Warner Music Inks Deal Wi... Billboard

With Youtube adjusting the previously-inflated view count, and Billboard announcing it will consider Youtube and online streams for chart position, this makes total sense.

But I think the days of streaming music on Youtube without being logged in (at the very least) or totally free (more likely) are numbered.

I think ads are meant to generate money not just for Youtube but royalties much like radio (or MTV, probably a closer comparison).

[Edited 3/5/13 18:22pm]

Cinny said:

With Youtube adjusting the previously-inflated view count, and Billboard announcing it will consider Youtube and online streams for chart position, this makes total sense.

But I think the days of streaming music on Youtube without being logged in (at the very least) or totally free (more likely) are numbered.

I think ads are meant to generate money not just for Youtube but royalties much like radio (or MTV, probably a closer comparison).

[Edited 3/5/13 18:22pm]

I hate ads. They turn me off.

YouTube right now has so many great full length albums and concerts on their site, that it's pretty much a smorgasborg of what you already heard and what you're interested in exploring. The content is great exposure to hear the music and learn more about the artist. I'm enjoying it while I can.

So does this means ultimate doom for Apple's iTunes or what?

TonyVanDam said:

So does this means ultimate doom for Apple's iTunes or what?

I think you're right. Never mind buying a disc, most people skip DOWNLOADING, and just stream whatever they want to hear in that moment.

Cinny said:

TonyVanDam said:

So does this means ultimate doom for Apple's iTunes or what?

I think you're right. Never mind buying a disc, most people skip DOWNLOADING, and just stream whatever they want to hear in that moment.

We can only hope Jamie Starr doesn't f*** Google's whole game plan up when it comes to some fans wanting to stream the MPLS classics.

TonyVanDam said:

Cinny said:

I think you're right. Never mind buying a disc, most people skip DOWNLOADING, and just stream whatever they want to hear in that moment.

We can only hope Jamie Starr doesn't f*** Google's whole game plan up when it comes to some fans wanting to stream the MPLS classics.

I think as long as he gets some royalties for these on-demand streams, he will be happy. What he hated about Youtube was there was no payment for the content or traffic his songs provided.

It actually reminds me of the early days of MTV when MTV didn't pay a cent for all of the videos they showed, until they were making money hand over fist. Then there was a re-negotiation and payback to the labels.

Maybe now that Youtube is 7-8 years old and established, they finally have the data and technology to pay for views like spins.

TonyVanDam said:

Cinny said:

I think you're right. Never mind buying a disc, most people skip DOWNLOADING, and just stream whatever they want to hear in that moment.

We can only hope Jamie Starr doesn't f*** Google's whole game plan up when it comes to some fans wanting to stream the MPLS classics.

well thing is that Artists are gonna get screwed big time with this, and not new ones, the old ones before any of this tech existed, this is the Shit that Don Henley was fighting this is why you didnt have the Beatles on iTunes for so long, some artists will have no power OR get a % of that streaming, yes thats right, so Prince and many others may have new reasons to really hate their former labels.

Cinny said:

With Youtube adjusting the previously-inflated view count, and Billboard announcing it will consider Youtube and online streams for chart position, this makes total sense.

But I think the days of streaming music on Youtube without being logged in (at the very least) or totally free (more likely) are numbered.

I think ads are meant to generate money not just for Youtube but royalties much like radio (or MTV, probably a closer comparison).

[Edited 3/5/13 18:22pm]

I think YouTube is gonna soon have some form of payment required and i think Facebook is gonna too, i think the days of free are over folks.

lastdecember said:

Cinny said:

With Youtube adjusting the previously-inflated view count, and Billboard announcing it will consider Youtube and online streams for chart position, this makes total sense.

But I think the days of streaming music on Youtube without being logged in (at the very least) or totally free (more likely) are numbered.

I think ads are meant to generate money not just for Youtube but royalties much like radio (or MTV, probably a closer comparison).

[Edited 3/5/13 18:22pm]

I think YouTube is gonna soon have some form of payment required and i think Facebook is gonna too, i think the days of free are over folks.

bitches, they better start producing some good music then. cause all that mainstream shit is shit.

Also I have seen Youtube linking the account with the name on your Gmail account. Pushing really hard to put your real name on Youtube. They really wanna know who is listening to this stuff.

Cinny said:

Also I have seen Youtube linking the account with the name on your Gmail account. Pushing really hard to put your real name on Youtube. They really wanna know who is listening to this stuff.

yes, it pisse me off everytime, im so tired of logging in.