Audiam, led by Jeff Price and Peter Wells, Raises $500,000 for U.S. Expansion

Audiam, a start-up company headed by TuneCore co-founders Jeff Price and Peter Wells, announced today that it has raised $500,000 in order to expand into the U.S. market. Investors include TuneSat Chief Executive Scott Schreer, Tom Cohen of PTC Advisors, Jonathan Siegel, and TuneSat’s Chief Operating Officer, Chris Woods.

Audiam helps artists monetize user-uploaded YouTube content that feature their music and represents more than 1,000 artists. It identifies YouTube videos that use an artist’s music and then claims the right to place ads via the video on behalf of the artist.

 

youtube

11 Responses

  1. Visitor
    Visitor

    I was very skeptical at first, but here are some very good news:

    1) Audiam’s FAQ now makes it perfectly clear that the company does not take any money from your own YouTube videos.

    2) Audiam now claims that it can get you higher paying ads.

    So best of luck to Mr. Price & Wells!

    Now we just need a similar service to scan the rest of the web for unauthorized song copies and either remove or monetize them — one way or way another, in or out of court.

    That service will be the biggest internet success ever.

    Reply
    • Visitor
      Visitor

      …I just have one question for Mr. Price if he reads this:

      Isn’t this part of your FAQ a bit risky?

      “How Can I use YouTube like Kickstarter to raise money?

      Tell your fans to use your recordings in their videos or cover your songs, and you will get paid from views of their videos.”

      To my ears, it sounds like an open invitation to kill you in court. I.e. “man, his work is obviously in the Public Domain; look at this, he even encourages fans to copy/sample/cover his work and use it for free on YouTube”)…

      Reply
      • Jeff Price
        Jeff Price

        It’s a good question, copyright is confusing

        The answer: telling your fans to use your music in their YouTube videos has nothing to do with something being in the public domain

        Public domain means the music is so old that the copyright expired. Once they cpoyright expires, its free for anyone to use without a license.

        If someone is using your music while copyrigth protected and does not have the right licenses, they are infringing on your rights.

        Below is a quick cut and paste from the US Government copyright sight the describes what public domain is – in a nutshell, its life of the author + another 70 years. After that, its public domain

        The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found inCircular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.

        Reply
        • Visitor
          Visitor

          “telling your fans to use your music in their YouTube videos has nothing to do with something being in the public domain”

          Hello, thank you for both answers! I’ll talk to TuneCore about the other ‘issue’.

          But let me clarify what I meant here:

          I’m sure you of all people are aware how important it is for songwriters to protect our property.

          And the simple fact is that everything you’ve ever said and done in public as a rightholder can and will be used against you, if another artist for instance steals 3 bars from you and you suddenly find yourself in a plagiarism case.

          Now, I have a pretty good idea what the opponent’s lawyer is going to say in such a case if he can prove that you actually invited people to use your music for free.

          And no, such an invitation does not in any way mean that you have given up any of your rights. But the opponent will use it to the max.

          Do you see what I mean?

          I didn’t bring this up because I wanted to start a discussion. I brought it up because your suggestion is very interesting and tempting. But also, perhaps, risky.

          Reply
        • Reason Vox
          Reason Vox

          Public domain status not limited to expired works.

          Abandonment of copyright — non-enforcement by copyright owner — is another path to the public domain.

          Search on phrase copyright abandonment — you’ll quickly see it is incorrect to suggest public domain status is limited to expired works.

          http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/abandonment-of-copyright/

          If you tell the public they can copy your music without permission, you run a risk of it becoming public domain much sooner than expiration. It also confuses enforcement efforts down the line.

          Reply
          • Visitor
            Visitor

            “If you tell the public they can copy your music without permission, you run a risk of it becoming public domain much sooner than expiration. It also confuses enforcement efforts down the line.”

            Thank you for looking into this. Yes, it seems we have to conclude that this is a dangerous suggestion.

            And I can’t help wondering how Mr. Price could come up with the idea in the first place.

          • D' Michael
            D' Michael

            I think he was proposing artists to tell fans to upload content so they can claim more videos. You can’t claim the video without the composition (covers) and/or sound recordings within the video. If you have massive fans but none of these fans don’t upload videos the service can’t work. It’s driven by the fanbase. What gets tricky is if a “fan” demands a “cut” of the revenue because they know they were the ones that stirred the pot. Also, if there is no videos to claim on YT, then that looks bad with the partnership.

          • Visitor
            Visitor

            “What gets tricky is if a “fan” demands a “cut” of the revenue because they know they were the ones that stirred the pot”

            I don’t think anybody would have much luck with that.

            But I guess Mr. Price has been so focused on YouTube that he missed the fact that an artist’s actions on the tube can have consequences elsewhere.

          • D’ Michael
            D’ Michael

            The “fans” could take down their videos at least I think. Audiam is only claiming the composition and sound recording within the video. I think the uploader (fan) has the right to do what they want to do with the video. If not, the video will probably be black and you just hear audio.

            I don’t think Mr. Price is much too concerned about what happens to the artist. He’s more concerned about how many videos he can claim for that artist.

      • Jeff Price
        Jeff Price

        I cant speak for TuneCore on that one. Best to ask them if they will let you make money on your own music on YouTube or if they are going to stop you from doing that

        Im very sorry this is even an issue.

        jeff

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Verify Your Humanity *