"As with all Google products, the Transparency Report is an iterative project, and we chose to begin with Search.  Increasing the amount of information we disclose in the Transparency Report is an ongoing effort.  We hope to continue on this trend, and to the extent that we can, keep releasing more information about access to information on our services."

Takedowns are not enough. By the time a video is taken down, the damage is done. So financial penalties need to be assessed against the uploader in proportion to the number of views.

- V

Fining uploaders, consumers, or even so-called "pirates" is always the establishment-owned, entertainment industry's answer to their lack of rebust profits (so they say) but the real answer is to make digital, hard-copy content available for cheaper. Lower your prices and use the free-market as a solution instead of using big-governent, Orwellian solutions such as SOPA/PIPA and fining people. And, cut the crap about job loses, please. What should happen is a large, damaging consumer strike that will finally teach the entertainment industry the lesson it needs to show who's really in command. You can't force people to fill your pockets, you have to invite them to. My take is drop dead and keep your so-called "intellectual property," if you're so bent on controlling it so much. 

'Lower your prices'? You obviously have a). no experience in the economics of making, distributing and marketing a record, and b). haven't tried to buy music for a very long time. Here in the UK many new digital albums are £5 on release, and you can pick up many classic CDs (including delivery) for even less. If you still consider that too much to pay for an album, you don't deserve to have ears.

Exactly.  The comment you've responded to is pirate-speak for "your stuff should be free because I want it for free irrespective of the consequences.  I do not care if you starve."

I'd also like to add that they probably don't have their eyes peeled for good deals on music.

Just today I got a coupon for $4 off an album of at least $7.99.  So basically I can get an album for half off and spend under $5.  Music is pretty dirt cheap.

The only thing I would complain about for the companies on their side would be the breakdown of where the money in every $1 track goes to and distribution of income within the companies.  The company could pay themselves a little less in order to pay performers more and what the company takes in, could probably be distributed to make sure that the underling staff and interns can afford to live.  Some companies do have a douche-y response to fair use practices, but that doesn't mean that musicians and the staff behind them shouldn't be paid for their work.

Your last paragraph says it all. Nothing will change until RIAA can generate more political influence than google.  I think MPAA is not going to back RIAA as much as they would like.

In Europe at least there are some signs that governments are steadily waking up to the fact that Google aren't an entirely benevolent organisation. For all their lobbying power (both directly and through stealth, as in their support of charitable institutions and activist groups that very vocally have their back) there is a realisation that they pay hardly any tax and employ relatively few local people.

there appear to be illegal uploads available for streaming and download all over soundcloud.  would be cool to get a comment from them about it as well if you could.

here is a link to 500+ tracks by Mumford and Sons available to be streamed and in some cases downloaded for free:

http://soundcloud.com/search?q[fulltext]=mumford+and+sons

not sure why soundcloud is getting a free pass here since it has grown so large and even has a robust api that allows many other companies to access this illegal music through apps etc.

Soundcloud isn't immune.  They were under fire and taken to court directly by UMG for illegal content as of last year and multiple "non-compliance" with take down requests.

The problem with Soundcloud though is that the reason why there's so much illegal content is because it allows users to upload songs of their favorite artists irrespective of whether or not the artist wants it up.  They don't appear to have a check system or screening to make sure artists that have flagged their music to not be eligible for upload don't come up even if their fans want it up.

Soundcloud has a bunch of legit music up too, but just reading the "Why is my music already on your site?" part of the FAQ already highlights some fallacies about the practices in their system.

It bothers me that people upload songs that they don't own AND monetize the videos. It's one thing to upload and leave it alone but to earn money from other people's hard work is bullshit. Why doesn't YouTube do a better job of preventing this? Why do people do this and then complain that artists and labels are greedy? Our society has turned into a cesspit of "me me me" intitilement.

Because there are too many videos getting uploaded. Digital finger-print technology is only so effective and can't determine what is and isn't fair-use. So things must be done manually. Youtube does a better job than most other video sites, but there is so much being uploaded that they can't get ahead.

Youtube could do a better job at handling repeat offenders.

I hear ya. I just find it ironic that many of my clients recieve repeat warnings about songs that they own but these assholes seem to avoid detection and profit. The system is broken. Unfortunately many in the tech world don't give a shit about compensating musicians and one day it will backfire on them when we're left with shitty mega pop music or amatuer trash with nothing in between. The average artist is getting screwed these days. Our culture doesnt value art anymore. We want everything for free  and arent willing to work for it. Its a broader problem with society, not just music.

Its also crazy that tech ceos like daniel ek and others rake in the cash while they 'fight piracy' and artists starve. What a fucking joke. These guys are just as greedy as the dinosaur labels that everyone hates. If theyre truly dedicated to helping artists earn money, why dont they take a pay cut? Of course they wont, because people are out for themelves and dont give a shit about the artists.

Prince was right.

Just Google it!