It's not the RIAA today, it's the National Musical Publishers Association. And it's not peer-to-peer sharing, it's YouTube. Different parties, same old stories. We want the money!!
The NPMA is concerned that songwriters aren't receiving money when their songs are played on YouTube, and David Israelite [hmmm... I wonder where he's from], the chief executive of the group, said he is "very concerned about YouTube's approach to copyright".
YouTube maintains they are perfectly within the boundaries of the law, as they remove any clips, as requested, if they violate copyright.
The NMPA has joined forces with Viacom on this charge, and Israelite said his group's involvement was simply, "to protect the interests of music publishers and songwriters, whose creative works are being used without permission or compensation by YouTube."
And here we go again.
Yet another group is failing to see the potential in having material on YouTube. If you want to watch a band's video, where do you go? Maybe Fuse, on TV, but otherwise? Online. It's not like you can buy videos. It's not like you can even watch videos, but for an hour or two here and there on MTV. And people want videos. Hence, YouTube serves a purpose: it gets the music to the people.
Instead of fighting and trying to sue YouTube or get your songs removed from the service, why not try working with YouTube? Finding a way for them -- as well as your group and the artists you represent -- to make money from the service? This isn't rocket science....
Am I missing something here? Why are these companies so desperate to fight the technology that people want, and the sites that people like to use?
