Neil Young Not Happy With YouTube

According to Young's blog (cleverly titled 'NY Times'), YouTube has underpaid Warner artists, whose peers on other record labels have been getting larger licensing checks. Young points out that, because Warner Reprise was one of the first labels to cooperate with YouTube, its contract did not wind up being as attractive as those signed later on by more cautious labels.
Looking for something in the way of a solution, Young wrote, "If all artists were compensated equally, and the people decided who had the hits and misses by virtue of number of downloads and plays, there would be no grounds for disagreement that would cause the facilitator of the art to break the conduit between an artist and an audience."
Could you imagine such a thing? A media company would license the songs of musicians, and then broadcast them. Folks would call in for the particular songs they wanted to hear. The most in-demand songs would make their corresponding artists and labels even more money. And we could call the whole thing "radio." [From: NeilYoung.com Via: CNET News]
Related Links:





Live from Microsoft's New Generation Xbox event!
Xbox Reveal liveblog on Joystiq
Dozens Killed in Oklahoma Tornado; Death Toll to Rise
Justin Bieber Booed, Gets Standing Ovation at Billboard Music Awards
2013 Billboard Music Awards Best and Worst Dressed
Watch: Kansas Meteorologist Seeks Shelter From Tornado
Xbox One architecture panel liveblog!
Two Pilots Fired After Brazilian Pop Star Takes Captain's Seat Mid-Flight
Oldest Water on Earth Found Deep Underground
2013 Billboard Music Awards: All the Winners!














Comments
1
Subscribe to commentsJust ThinkingMar 3rd 2009 4:19PM
It sounds like Neil should really be taking issue with Warner Reprise rather than YouTube. There are inherent advantages and risks in being the first mover in new areas of technology. In this case, for a while Warner artists will get paid less until the current contract runs out. He's the one who signed a contract to let them negotiate the rights to his music. If he doesn't like how they've done it, he can take it up with them when his current contract comes up for renegotiation. I wonder how vocal he would be if the other labels who came later ended up getting lower rates than Warner Reprise. (I certainly haven't heard many other labels artists complaining about Warner artists being underpaid...)
As for the false popularity contest that he proposes, I'm sure that most media companies (including YouTube) would be happy to license any technology Mr Young comes up with that will actually prevent stuffing the ballot box (i.e. download count fraud) while still preserving the diverse means of access and privacy that he also espouses. His "idea" is just a rehash of the RIAA model that perpetuates the airplay of those who are already established artists, a musical royalty rather than the egalitarian utopia he alleges.
I love Neil Young's music, and laud him for participating in an important discussion on the boundaries of usage and distribution. I strongly encourage him to become a bit more informed before complaining about things into which he has little insight.