Comments on: Neil Young: YouTube must respect artists

Rocker says YouTube doesn't compensate music artists equally or fairly and says Warner acts are penalized.

[thunderhammer]

It's kind of sad how all the old artists are totally out of touch...

[sciontcya]

Yeah, dumb-ass old farts want paid for their work...when will they get a clue???
Dipstick.

[ewelch]

Out of touch with losers who think the world owes them? Who think everything they want should be free while they should be handsomely paid for their lame little contribution to the universe?

Indeed, dipstick.

[knowles2]

sciontcya they already been paid for the songs they what in case recorded decades ago they most likely been paid many times what it to actually cost to produce the records.

[QuetzalcoatlUSA]

Maybe Neil should find a new label. Warner is stuck in the past.

[n0v0cane]

I guess he doesn't want to lose his residuals.

[dudemanguysondog]

Honestly I haven't missed Warner's content. Now there is less crap in the way of original and unique videos made by amateurs, you know the people who made youtube.

[Sam Papelbon]

i hope neil young will remember the internet don't need him around anyhow

[thelemurking]

LOL be careful, you might get sued for copyright infringement.

[unknown unknown]

Neil Young sounds pretty clueless. Better or more popular artists are going to get better deals. Labels with more of the popular artists are going to get better deals because they have more leverage.

Warner only has barely a handful of artists that are currently popular.

[Hike_Every_Day]

If Neil is hurting for money maybe he should go on tour.

I think Trent Reznor is the only artist who can see where the future is going in digital music. His free music releases are accompanied by unique products that have value to collectors, such as autographed limited edition copies and special vinyl printings. Everyone else seems stuck in the last century.

Get with the program, Neil. The sixties are over!

[thelemurking]

Don't forget Radiohead... it was great how they did the pay what you want, or don't pay at all, then a few months later release it on CD with stickers and artwork. There's a few other bands out there that know what's going on, but the problem always reverts back to the labels they are on. When you get to the point of stardom like NIN or Radiohead, you can afford to take those chances and risks.

I've been a fan of NIN since way back in 87 right before Pretty Hate Machine was released... Glad he dropped the whole saxophone thing :)

[terminalblue]

well, i am off to the pirate bay to bootleg everything ever of neil young's!

[Maccess]

Youtube needs a facility so that original artists and creators have a way sharing in the ad revenues of the material they put up--they should also be provided some means to certify their work as original (to differentiate the copycats who will upload the same material under their own accounts).

[JohnM999]

YouTube videos hardly qualify as content. The video and audio quality is usually not so good and the experience is, overall, not very satisfying compared to other media formats. Anyone who thinks that they can gainfully charge for a video a few inches wide on a computer screen is out of their mind. Would you really pay for that?

Exposure is YouTube's stock and trade and smart artists know this.

Disabling embedding on YouTube videos is equally short-sighted.

Example:

Hot Chip - One Pure Thought on Astralwerks YouTube channel (embedding disabled): 10,432 views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG-i-tyPrHw

Hot Chip - One Pure Thought on Hot Chip YouTube channel (embedding enabled): 344,189 views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAev1ZjE3dI

This is just one example of hundreds that I have encountered. More online exposure will likely result in more media sales and higher attendance at live shows.

I have been turned on to many excellent artists via YouTube/Vimeo/Daily Motion, and if I am driven to support them with my money, the last thing I'm going to look for is a dinky, pay-per-play online video.

Old-timey business models will eventually die off and the smart artists and business people will adapt. It has always been this way.

It's the middle-man, i.e. the media corporations, that stand to lose out, as it is they who are getting nudged out in the deal - at least their exploitive business practices at the expense of both artist and consumer - and that's a good thing.

[JadedGamer]

Why aren't music videos considered advertising in its own right? The labels should pay YouTube for showing those videos particularly if they lead someone to buy the music.

[gggg sssss]

and payola should be made legal again

[satchelcornstalk]

not good . not good. to tramp over you tube. video=consumer might buy cd. austintatious to ask for respect of the warner family and you tube. it leads me to distrust the artist. and i am hopeful that was not his intention.