4 ms·

One answer to this madness is to starve the beast: never buy any music or any content from an established company. Torrent everything. It may not work at all, b

by bambax 1y ago

One answer to this madness is to starve the beast: never buy any music or any content from an established company. Torrent everything. It may not work at all, but at least you can tell yourself you're not helping the bastards.

dokyun 1y ago
+1 for Soulseek
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  It's still better than things like Spotify. I listen to a lot of traditional Irish music and love to do things like shuffling a playlist of all the same tune by different performers. To do that on Spotify I need to search the tune name, then create a new playlist and manually add them all. With my local files I can just grep, even the metadata, and pipe it into a playlist for mpv to play instantly.
rglullis 1y ago
Few people are buying anything in this world where streaming is the norm and the labels make money by cutting deals with the distribution platforms. The solution for me, in this specific case, would be for Beato to act against YouTube and take his channel elsewhere. He has enough followers to be able to start his own Peertube server, find a few sponsors and keep going forever.
- motoxpro 1y ago
  Neither the GP or this comment are viable in the real world. Businesses/creators need continued distribution, see Nike as an example of what happens when you "take your audience elsewhere to monetize them better/more." 1. People buy the other option (in Nike's case they kept going to footlocker and buying other shoes rather than only buying Nike DTC, in Beato's case they would continue to go to YouTube to discover new guitar content) 2. The business can't get new customers because no one is on the new platform (Nike DTC/Peertube) It's viable for a split second (covid, "stick it to Youtube cause they suck") then people just go back to living their lives.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    > in Beato's case they would continue to go to YouTube to discover new guitar content He's in a unique market position though because he's got industry respect. Joe Bloggs in his bedroom can't compete with "guitar content" because Dave Gilmore, Pat Matheney and Glynn Johns aren't all going to sit with him for a 2 hour long interview.
    - hnlmorg 1y ago
      The GP is still correct. People are lazy. If you add even a small complication for people to consume content, then it doesn’t matter how much respect that content creator has, people will just follow someone else instead. Google knows this; which is why they can screw over content creators on their platform.
      - rglullis 1y ago
        https://grayjay.app/ https://grayjay.app/ solves this quite well.
        hnlmorg 1y ago
        Same problem applies: That’s another site to read. Another app to download. Another product to discover. I nearly didn’t even open the link because I didn’t want to learn something new before I’d had my morning cup of earl grey. Chances are the average consumer wouldn’t bother — assuming they even discover about this to begin with.
        rglullis 1y ago
        "Hey everyone, I'm Rick Beato. I am tired of dealing with YouTube constantly threatening my livelihood, so now I will be focused on my own channel. I will be posting here as well for whatever they let me, but to get full videos just download the GrayJay app (link in description) and look for my channel (link also in description)." That's all it would take to get a few hundred thousand people to download it, and you'd know that the those who are going through the effort are higher-value subscribers, so it would be even easier to bring better sponsors. I really don't like arguments based on "I am lazy to do that, therefore everyone is". It's at best defeatist cowardice and at worst a malicious way to support the status quo.
- JdeBP 1y ago
  Given that xe has "a great lawyer", the logical choice for M. Beato is to move to Nebula, if anywhere. That said, xyr lawyer is getting this rejected on fair use grounds again and again. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLHU0ZUbXX8&t=123s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLHU0ZUbXX8&t=123s The beef is less with YouTube and far more with Universal Music Group. After all, it's not as if YouTube has upheld the copyright claims. The proper outcome is for Universal Music Group to stop the insanity, trying this same thing (reportedly) hundreds of times against the same person across years of that person's video catalogue, and getting the same adverse result every time. (So much for the marketers's claims that "AI" systems learn. (-:) Unfortunately, there's no obvious pressure point, other than some sort of public boycott of UMG, for making this happen. UMG's lawyers have no financial incentive to stop making claims, and are using robotic tools. YouTube would open a huge can of worms by (say) blanket rejecting copyright claims from UMG, and Google has no incentive for causing this sort of trouble with UMG for itself again. M. Beato doesn't have much in the way of levers to pull, and there's the matter of several other well-known YouTubers reporting (in response to this, but also before) that they continually have to deal with the same thing, which a Beato-only fix would not address.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - AstralStorm 1y ago
    The only way to do that would be to sue them with a big badass class lawsuit. This one is doable. And then a tort for wasting everyone's time and ruining the media. Not seeing how that one would come to pass though.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 1y ago
  What does Youtube have to do with it? This appears to be a story about Universal Music Group. Stop featuring their artists, and tell anyone on that label to move to a different label if they want to be featured on the channel.
  - rglullis 1y ago
    Who gets to "demonitize" the videos? YouTube. Who gets to process the copyright strike and tell creators they need to remove the content in order to not have consequences? YouTube. Who gets to close down the channel even before any lawsuit against a copyright allegation is conducted? YouTube. Beato is fighting BMG because he sees YouTube as the hand that feeds him, but he could get rid of all the BMG annoyances if he was brave enough to own his distribution channel.
    - AstralStorm 1y ago
      YouTube could be subjected to a class action in theory not in practice, because the terms of the site are so loose you can get ejected with no recourse and lose wages, while indemnifying them. UMG however has not any relationship with the author so they actually can be sued. If they hate their subcontractor YouTube for it, that's their problem. They're the legal entity on behalf of which blocking is done, after all.
    - 0xDEAFBEAD 1y ago
      Youtube has those policies in place in order to comply with copyright law, yes? In the long run, I would expect smaller platforms to adopt similar policies as they grow, in order to achieve compliance with copyright law.
      - rglullis 1y ago
        > Youtube has those policies in place in order to comply with copyright law A lot of it is just CYA and enforcement theater. YouTube could pretty much have one dedicated account manager for someone with the subscriber count of Beato who would work as a first-line of defense against frivolous/bogus copyright claims. > I would expect smaller platforms to adopt similar policies as they grow But then the content creators who take ownership of their social media presence will by definition be a lot closer to those making these types of decisions, and they will be able to say "I don't think I am infringing on anything, if you really disagree you will have to go to court".
- bambax 1y ago
  > in this world where streaming is the norm Subscribing to Spotify is feeding the beast. And so is not blocking ads on YT.
atoav 1y ago
There are many smaller bands that sell their stuff more or less directly, e.g. via bandcamp or directly via small independent record labels. Buy their stuff, it helps them to survive. But mayor record labels can go die in a ditch.
neilv 1y ago
We're partly in this police state mess of legislation and user-hostile technology because of the history of piracy. Piracy isn't going to starve the bastards. Piracy is helping the bastards, by giving them reason or pretext.
- jalapenos 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - neilv 1y ago
    I just said how it helps them. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- realusername 1y ago
  For a very long time, piracy was the only way to get media online because the conglomerates refused to sell music and movies online. We didn't get there because of piracy.
jalapenos 1y ago
I'm surprised at the presumption anyone is paying for music downloads. If true - shocking. Good reminder about democracy though. If you just make it about "I'm in power because I voted who's in power (or maybe I will next time)", once every 4 years with your non-lobbyist tiny say, you're actually anti-democracy. Democracy is, and has always been, long before universal access to the ballot box, reliable and consistent resistance to the cunts at the top.
codedokode 1y ago
You must be working at an AI company.
animuchan 1y ago
Absolutely, the least we can do is not participate.

by bambax 1y ago

dokyun 1y ago

+1 for Soulseek

AlecSchueler 1y ago
It's still better than things like Spotify. I listen to a lot of traditional Irish music and love to do things like shuffling a playlist of all the same tune by different performers. To do that on Spotify I need to search the tune name, then create a new playlist and manually add them all. With my local files I can just grep, even the metadata, and pipe it into a playlist for mpv to play instantly.

rglullis 1y ago

Few people are buying anything in this world where streaming is the norm and the labels make money by cutting deals with the distribution platforms. The solution for me, in this specific case, would be for Beato to act against YouTube and take his channel elsewhere. He has enough followers to be able to start his own Peertube server, find a few sponsors and keep going forever.

motoxpro 1y ago
Neither the GP or this comment are viable in the real world. Businesses/creators need continued distribution, see Nike as an example of what happens when you "take your audience elsewhere to monetize them better/more." 1. People buy the other option (in Nike's case they kept going to footlocker and buying other shoes rather than only buying Nike DTC, in Beato's case they would continue to go to YouTube to discover new guitar content) 2. The business can't get new customers because no one is on the new platform (Nike DTC/Peertube) It's viable for a split second (covid, "stick it to Youtube cause they suck") then people just go back to living their lives.
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  > in Beato's case they would continue to go to YouTube to discover new guitar content He's in a unique market position though because he's got industry respect. Joe Bloggs in his bedroom can't compete with "guitar content" because Dave Gilmore, Pat Matheney and Glynn Johns aren't all going to sit with him for a 2 hour long interview.
  - hnlmorg 1y ago
    The GP is still correct. People are lazy. If you add even a small complication for people to consume content, then it doesn’t matter how much respect that content creator has, people will just follow someone else instead. Google knows this; which is why they can screw over content creators on their platform.
    - rglullis 1y ago
      https://grayjay.app/ https://grayjay.app/ solves this quite well.
      - hnlmorg 1y ago
        Same problem applies: That’s another site to read. Another app to download. Another product to discover. I nearly didn’t even open the link because I didn’t want to learn something new before I’d had my morning cup of earl grey. Chances are the average consumer wouldn’t bother — assuming they even discover about this to begin with.
        rglullis 1y ago
        "Hey everyone, I'm Rick Beato. I am tired of dealing with YouTube constantly threatening my livelihood, so now I will be focused on my own channel. I will be posting here as well for whatever they let me, but to get full videos just download the GrayJay app (link in description) and look for my channel (link also in description)." That's all it would take to get a few hundred thousand people to download it, and you'd know that the those who are going through the effort are higher-value subscribers, so it would be even easier to bring better sponsors. I really don't like arguments based on "I am lazy to do that, therefore everyone is". It's at best defeatist cowardice and at worst a malicious way to support the status quo.
JdeBP 1y ago
Given that xe has "a great lawyer", the logical choice for M. Beato is to move to Nebula, if anywhere. That said, xyr lawyer is getting this rejected on fair use grounds again and again. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLHU0ZUbXX8&t=123s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLHU0ZUbXX8&t=123s The beef is less with YouTube and far more with Universal Music Group. After all, it's not as if YouTube has upheld the copyright claims. The proper outcome is for Universal Music Group to stop the insanity, trying this same thing (reportedly) hundreds of times against the same person across years of that person's video catalogue, and getting the same adverse result every time. (So much for the marketers's claims that "AI" systems learn. (-:) Unfortunately, there's no obvious pressure point, other than some sort of public boycott of UMG, for making this happen. UMG's lawyers have no financial incentive to stop making claims, and are using robotic tools. YouTube would open a huge can of worms by (say) blanket rejecting copyright claims from UMG, and Google has no incentive for causing this sort of trouble with UMG for itself again. M. Beato doesn't have much in the way of levers to pull, and there's the matter of several other well-known YouTubers reporting (in response to this, but also before) that they continually have to deal with the same thing, which a Beato-only fix would not address.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- AstralStorm 1y ago
  The only way to do that would be to sue them with a big badass class lawsuit. This one is doable. And then a tort for wasting everyone's time and ruining the media. Not seeing how that one would come to pass though.
0xDEAFBEAD 1y ago
What does Youtube have to do with it? This appears to be a story about Universal Music Group. Stop featuring their artists, and tell anyone on that label to move to a different label if they want to be featured on the channel.
- rglullis 1y ago
  Who gets to "demonitize" the videos? YouTube. Who gets to process the copyright strike and tell creators they need to remove the content in order to not have consequences? YouTube. Who gets to close down the channel even before any lawsuit against a copyright allegation is conducted? YouTube. Beato is fighting BMG because he sees YouTube as the hand that feeds him, but he could get rid of all the BMG annoyances if he was brave enough to own his distribution channel.
  - AstralStorm 1y ago
    YouTube could be subjected to a class action in theory not in practice, because the terms of the site are so loose you can get ejected with no recourse and lose wages, while indemnifying them. UMG however has not any relationship with the author so they actually can be sued. If they hate their subcontractor YouTube for it, that's their problem. They're the legal entity on behalf of which blocking is done, after all.
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 1y ago
    Youtube has those policies in place in order to comply with copyright law, yes? In the long run, I would expect smaller platforms to adopt similar policies as they grow, in order to achieve compliance with copyright law.
    - rglullis 1y ago
      > Youtube has those policies in place in order to comply with copyright law A lot of it is just CYA and enforcement theater. YouTube could pretty much have one dedicated account manager for someone with the subscriber count of Beato who would work as a first-line of defense against frivolous/bogus copyright claims. > I would expect smaller platforms to adopt similar policies as they grow But then the content creators who take ownership of their social media presence will by definition be a lot closer to those making these types of decisions, and they will be able to say "I don't think I am infringing on anything, if you really disagree you will have to go to court".
bambax 1y ago
> in this world where streaming is the norm Subscribing to Spotify is feeding the beast. And so is not blocking ads on YT.

atoav 1y ago

There are many smaller bands that sell their stuff more or less directly, e.g. via bandcamp or directly via small independent record labels. Buy their stuff, it helps them to survive. But mayor record labels can go die in a ditch.

neilv 1y ago

We're partly in this police state mess of legislation and user-hostile technology because of the history of piracy. Piracy isn't going to starve the bastards. Piracy is helping the bastards, by giving them reason or pretext.

jalapenos 1y ago
[flagged]
- neilv 1y ago
  I just said how it helps them. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
realusername 1y ago
For a very long time, piracy was the only way to get media online because the conglomerates refused to sell music and movies online. We didn't get there because of piracy.

jalapenos 1y ago

I'm surprised at the presumption anyone is paying for music downloads. If true - shocking. Good reminder about democracy though. If you just make it about "I'm in power because I voted who's in power (or maybe I will next time)", once every 4 years with your non-lobbyist tiny say, you're actually anti-democracy. Democracy is, and has always been, long before universal access to the ballot box, reliable and consistent resistance to the cunts at the top.

codedokode 1y ago

You must be working at an AI company.

animuchan 1y ago

Absolutely, the least we can do is not participate.