| Blogs > Psyonic_Reaver |
|
Psyonic_Reaver
United States4342 Posts
So they have put a call out for musicians, of any kind, to email them and offer their music to be played on streams. They didn't give too much details, but I'm sure they will work out something beneficial for both parties. Contact Emmett Sear at emmett at justin dot tv   | ||
|
YunhOLee
Canada2470 Posts
| ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
On March 04 2011 03:10 YunhOLee wrote: lool so if im reading correctly, people that play starcraft2 and streams it wont be allowed to listen to music at the same time because viewers on justin.tv will hear it? Yeah, sounds pretty strange to me. I wonder if they can atleast play free internet radio-channels on stream? e. oh I guess that falls under freeware music? | ||
|
MoreFaSho
United States1427 Posts
On March 04 2011 03:20 HwangjaeTerran wrote: Yeah, sounds pretty strange to me. I wonder if they can atleast play free internet radio-channels on stream? e. oh I guess that falls under freeware music? Depends on the site. Most of the time you can't re-transmit. | ||
|
aike
United States1629 Posts
 Wouldn't mind submitting a few songs. | ||
|
Marl
United States694 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 108965
1096 Posts
| ||
|
DeckOneBell
United States526 Posts
On March 04 2011 03:54 Teogamer wrote: That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Why use Justin tv then? Not really. Pretty likely that streaming music before was already illegal, but not a big enough deal for Justin TV to enforce. As their ad revenue increases, they need to cover more of their legal bases. It's no different than the radio having to licence the music it plays. Or grocery stores, or restaurants. Not all people actually pay for the use of the music (beyond the initial purchase price) but legally, you are required to. EDIT: So more specifically, all streaming sites are supposed do this, but do not, necessarily, do this. | ||
|
XsebT
Denmark2980 Posts
Jtv seems quite different from the other streaming services since you can actually make profit from it, which we see e.g. incontrol and tyler use (/commercial). For Jtv not to be killed by countless copyright, I think this is a necessary move if this wish to continue their current business model. Also, as I understand it, the other streaming services are only against people having VODs containing copyrighted stuff. | ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
 | ||
intrigue
Washington, D.C9935 Posts
hmmmmmmmmmmm emailed! | ||
|
Skyze
Canada2324 Posts
Say you goto a hairdresser / barbershop, or any small store.. If they are playing the radio or any CDs there, they HAVE to pay the music rights to do so. In Canada, they pay SOCAN a business lisence to play public music, its a yearly amount then they can play the radio for that one year.. Im not sure the name of the organization in the US/other countries, but at least in North America, it is required. The reason why they do this, is so the artists who make those songs can get some money back for their music being played. I am a member of SOCAN, and while I dont have anything on the radio as an artist yet, Its an important part of how musicians make a living. Without royalties we would get very little after the initial sale of the album (which, as you know with illegal downloading these days is basically nothing) and live shows.. If someone is playing our music we should get paid for it.. if you were a graphic design artist, you wouldnt want someone using your graphics on their store without your permission, right? | ||
|
jtype
England2167 Posts
On March 04 2011 04:56 Skyze wrote: Im not sure the name of the organization in the US/other countries, but at least in North America, it is required. In America the main one is ASCAP and in the UK (and EU also I believe) its PRS. I'm a member of PRS, but a lot of my stuff isn't registered as I've given it out for free, or on a specific contract. On March 04 2011 04:56 Skyze wrote: you wouldnt want someone using your graphics on their store without your permission, right? This is true, but I think there's something to be said for the exposure that can be gained for artists by hearing commercial music on livestreams. I mean, I've tracked down artists that I've heard on other people's livestreams and, on some occasions, purchased those artist's albums. I wouldn't have made that purchase if I hadn't heard it on the stream. Also, a lot of what I hear, or what is being heard for free (on services like Spotify or Grooveshark), is being paid for by adverts. Couldn't the stream site just negotiate a percentage of ad revenue to be paid to the collection agencies? | ||
|
NrG.NeverExpo
Canada2114 Posts
| ||
|
KawaiiRice
United States2914 Posts
NO MORE NANA?!!! | ||
|
Zeroes
United States1102 Posts
| ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
| ||
|
Pokebunny
United States10654 Posts
On March 04 2011 05:46 KawaiiRice wrote: Whaaaaaat?! NO MORE NANA?!!! Yep. I'm really sad because I set up a new playlist for myself the day the email came @_@ | ||
|
Weasel-
Canada1556 Posts
| ||
|
aike
United States1629 Posts
On March 04 2011 05:46 KawaiiRice wrote: Whaaaaaat?! NO MORE NANA?!!! I have a feeling Nana will be allowed  | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
