Beyoncé and Rihanna Premiere Exclusive Tracks on Tidal; Fans Promptly Put Them on YouTube

Screen Shot 2015-04-06 at 9.15.44 AM

Tidal isn’t having the most well-received launch.  As Ari Herstand points out, a lot of fans of the service’s celebrity co-owners are pretty vocal about their dislike.

Over the weekend Tidal released two new exclusives from Rihanna and Beyoncé.

The new Rihanna track is called “American Oxygen”.  She performed the track at March Madness Music Fest before premiering it on Tidal, so there’s plenty of videos of the song online.

The new exclusive Beyoncé track/video is called “Die With You”.  The video features Beyoncé singing and playing the track on piano.

The track has already been ripped and uploaded to YouTube, over and over again.

Some of the tracks have been removed because of copyright infringement, but there’s plenty more online.

Tidal may have exclusives, but it’s pretty hard to keep them exclusive.


Nina Ulloa covers breaking news, tech, and more: @nine_u

62 Responses

  1. Anonymous

    a lot of fans of the service’s celebrity co-owners are pretty vocal about their dislike.

    Which is fine, those people complain, period, if the artists make them happy those people will just start whining about something else, its a waste of time to try and make them happy or please them, and with free music the fans will realize sooner or later that they are not the artists customers anymore, so if they also complain about the advertising and marketing and being a total cattle consumer, then they only have themselves to blame, there’s that whole adage be careful what you wish for…

    Its just the way it always is, people see tom cruise and brad pitt and george clooney and then just think that business is just filled with money and everyone is super duper rich and therefore feel justified when stealing everything and then have the audacity to demand more and more from them, when in reality, those types of industries and those types of careers are brutal, they suck, the money is super duper skint, its a constant holding the hat out to get work, its inconsistent and the potential to get to super star status is incredibly small, most people who are acting are working a side job and the rest are just workman type people making maybe a middle class wage, but just because a few of them are straight mega balling, everyone suddenly thinks they all are… Same thing with music, the few top dog number one gunning super celebs making hunny millies suddenly gets every last penny ante tom dick and harry to think everyone making music is some super rich balling person and therefore are even smug in their theft and demand more and more…

    just a lickly bit silly out there, most of those industries are brutal, just cause bobby flay and jamie oliver are balling doesnt mean the woman down at your local eatery slaving away on the grill for 13 hours a day is out balling living in a mansion, those celebrity people in any industry are really there to promote the industry to attract top talent to it, unfortunately its working in other ways and people are conveniently using it as a means to justify their inappropriate actions and to continue to perpetuate a broken system, the digital one…

    • PIRATES promptly put them on YouTube...

      fixed that headline…

      Beyoncé and Rihanna Premiere Exclusive Tracks on Tidal; PIRATES Promptly Put Them on YouTube

    • Anonymous

      Case in point immediately, complain and whine, it’s a terribly toxic industry and you get it from all sides and all people…

      All you people on the free music thing, show me, no, i demand yall start working on other things, make other things free, stand up and be it then, make rent and mortgage FREE, start getting me FREE FOOD, otherwise you are all just scared faceless petty little whining pathetic thieves doing no good for the world or society…

      Do that immediately else shut up and stop bothering people with your kindergarten playground schoolyard immature and lame bullying and stone tossing…

      Wouldnt free rent, mortgage and free food be better then free music?? Housing and food are two of my bigger expenses, music is not, work on those please if yall truly care about freedom as much as yall claim to…

      I want to own a house without a 35+ year mortgage and $100000 in interest over the term with rising house taxes and expenditures along the way to maintain the thing, a few free tiny wee digital files aint going to do anything for my life or my betterment or my advancement and taking music from those celebrities and super ballers, aint doing anything for anyone else and doesnt really hurt them that much, it hurts us, it hurts the little guy, it hurts the middle class, it is not hurting the rich or the elite, it just isnt, so figure it out people…

  2. Yep

    Exclusivity does not exist on the Internet.

    Why are these megastars so out of touch, with what is going on?

    It’s scary to think they have influence

    • Anonymous

      It’s scary to think they have influence

      What’s more scary to me, is they claim Taylor Swift is the 6th most influential person in the world right now, and all i ever see her do is promote Cheerios and McDonalds and talk about the teenage angst of dating and relationships, selling garbage junk to toddlers, tweens and teens… I never have ever not even once seen her say anything with any depth or philanthropy to it or anything in regards to serious world issues etc., shes a straight marketing machine selling junk to people, and that apparently makes her the 6th most influential person in the whole world?

      Thats asinine…

      Her team will eventually get her to publicly be super philanthropic and stuff in order to ensure they can maintain that position, but itll be all smoke and mirrors and lies and fronts, but really most of the true do gooders arent in need of showcasing it to the world with constant media hammering thus making what she will do nothing more then good PR stunting… How about the tons of people off the radar out of the spotlight who are working hard on things? There are so many people working on incredible inventions, working on curing diseases, working on science and physics, figuring serious problems and issues out, that you never ever ever hear about, because the masses, the young people who have the time to give to media etc. dont care about that stuff…

      We live in a world more so then ever that even with the proliferation of social media and quick spreading information and news, that the truly influential people wont be heard until they are dead and gone, as the truly influential people have a voice that threatens the corporate world a little bit, so they do what they do to keep the economy going and the big wheels turning, and if that is kind of lying to and duping the masses with their ridiculousness while ruining the lives and careers of many lower class people, then so be it, thats what they have to do…

      You cant tell growing children to eat McDonalds and be considered influential, yet if you tell them the truth, you are a villainous character to them and their show, you cant just sell product and be influential, and you cant bolster yourself to celebrity status and let your team create and manufacture philanthropic ventures all in the name of business and be considered influential…

      Jesus was influential, Ghandi was influential, Rosa Parks was influential, some of the people who worked on arpanet to help create the internet that no one ever hears about, they were influential, people that were not super famous under NDA’s taking orders and selling junk, and there are so many other people we will never even know existed were influential, product selling NDA restricted puppet order taking buy buy buy people are not influential and never will be, in the truest sense of what its all about…

      The more it goes corporate, the more we all sit around and are forced to listen to big bird tell us what to buy and to smile and shake hands with ronald mcdonald as a means to tap into that 60+ million twitter follower league of toddlers, tweens and teens, or telling people to buy KFC and totally overlooking the carbon footrpint the mistreat of animals the over salted and fattened foods that ultimately cause health problems and kill people and pollute the land and the whole fabric of society…

      Welcome to Corporatocracy, where common sense goes out the door and the most influential people are only those placated as such by those who need to make money, where money and those who make it, no matter how or what or why, are the most influential and most important people in our society…

  3. Edward Jennings

    I smell the fear in the hearts of the pirates.

  4. Name2

    Yeah, your 3rd link is just a bald guy talking about Beyonce for 5 minutes. The one from “MickiMinajTV” seems to be gone from YT, and a new one by “DIZY Entertainment” has <4K views.

  5. Versus


    Those who put the tracks on YouTube without permission are not “fans”.
    With “fans” like that, who needs enemies?

    • Anonymous

      right but then again we need to ensure we look at the landscape and full picture unbiasedly and objectively, as we say previously with beyonce and the user generated dance videos put on youtube without permission actually boosted her sales and her chart positions, with little mainstream marketing and promotion, so really, they are fans and to be honest i wouldnt put it past the business to be using people like that to do that work and then publicly taking a different stand and position in an effort to maintain and upkeep appearances…

      • Huh?

        “actually boosted her sales and her chart positions, with little mainstream marketing and promotion”… are you in the music business? I’m guessing not, because if you were, you’d have a clue on just how much “mainstream marketing and promotion” is ABSOLUTELY done for an act like Beyonce. Those costs are built into her contract, most likely, and just because someone posts videos doesn’t mean that that marketing money isn’t being spent and those efforts undertaken.

        • Anonymous

          “actually boosted her sales and her chart positions, with little mainstream marketing and promotion”… are you in the music business? I’m guessing not, because if you were, you’d have a clue on just how much “mainstream marketing and promotion” is ABSOLUTELY done for an act like Beyonce. Those costs are built into her contract, most likely, and just because someone posts videos doesn’t mean that that marketing money isn’t being spent and those efforts undertaken.

          You can grab your foot and take it out of your mouth as i’m referring to this specifically, see links below, something that someone in the actual music business would know a heck of a lot about…

          You people need to learn how to read, which is why ill make my stuff even harder to read, help weed them out on the daily, i was talking specifically about the partition song and how user generated content akin to piracy and nothing more…

          In regards to this video i was talking about, there was very little mainstream marketing done, period, that doesnt mean there wasnt any marketing money spent, just that for this particular song, it skyrocketed up the charts through mostly user generated content, period, thats it…

          Most likely does not make it so…

        • Anonymous

          that is correct huh, i stand by what i said because its actually irrefutable fact, and since you are posing as someone in the business and in the know while tossing little pebbles at me claiming i am not, its a little frightening you arent aware of this as it made headlines all over the place midst changing chart metrics… Anyone in the business of music would be well aware of such a thing and therefore i find it funny how you attack me about the marketing spend and how little i know of how it works, i never said anything about how it works and how much money is spent on marketing and promotion, however if you followed me you would know very well i talk about that all the time, never the less, check it out, the information is out there…

          Please just do a duckduckgo or whatever browser search for Partition + user generated videos + charts, or something like that, and you will find many articles discussing exactly what i said…

      • Anonymous

        And how do you go against billion dollar companies with teams and teams of lawyers like Vivendi and Universal and super famous super star celebrity artist after super famous super star celebrity artist?? How is the media and the show going to do anything but ruin your career and your reputation? Not everyone wants that kind of promotion…

        What lawyer will want to take on a probono case against the only people that can give them consistent business?? What businesses, all tied in and in bed with those big artists and their parent companies are going to be forth coming with the evidence needed in order to ensure a large settlement quickly? What computer forensic scientist is going to take on the job probono and what judge or court is going to approve the search warrant needed to get all their computers and harddrives? What ISP is going to still have all the data and which one is going to be helpful without task forcing and warranting them?

        Who is ultimately going to pay to enforce it? When it is enforced its going to help those who are doing a lot of the theft, those same super star celebrity artists, so why would i want to fight to enforce something that’s only going to benefit them?

        I wont get down with higher taxes to subsidize an industry that’s still ripping me off to go out and enforce laws they break all the time, so who is going to pay for it?

        When it is enforced, are they going to stink eye and mean mug and track and spy those celebrity artists and those large corporations just as much as they will the small guy and the individual, like myself?

        no way im falling in line for that when i know in the end its not going to benefit me in the slightest and not only will it cost me, i wont get any justice, and they will all get richer and richer and richer…

        • Anonymous

          The main problem is Google. Fix Google, and most of the problem goes away.

          Technically, it would be very easy for Google to block well known criminal sites like the Pirate Bay permanently — Google’s own child porn politics prove that.

          But Google makes a lot of money from piracy.

          And the current law was written in another century that couldn’t anticipate Google’s and the Pirate Bay’s industrialized abuse.

          • Anonymous

            but google’s business model isn’t piracy, they did’nt get into it to do piracy, they are suffering from other people using their roads to do illegal things, they aren’t the police, it ultimately isn’t their responsibility, as well they just dont want to cover the bill to enforce something they have nothing to do with, like anyone would…

            thing is, as ive said before, you do that and you push it back underground, you force them to include that in their algorithms and then we have 1984 staring us in the face, we also then make it even harder and more work to find out who is pirating your work thus costing you more money and man power to track it down…

            Its all building up for a new regulatory and law enforcement body to be created, jurisdictions are going to be a problem… The internet wont be a wild wild west forever, the smart people are those who got in early and gamed it and stole and greased and committed mass crimes, as they made out like bandits, those of us who missed that boat will ultimately then pay the price for those few bad seeds, and im way over tired of paying the price for other peoples stupidity…

            Quite frankly, i think blocking the child porn is stupid, we all know its surveillance city and spy and trackersville, so just leave it free and open and then just go after those people making it available, IN THE REAL WORLD DOWN HERE ON THE GROUND, just like they could to the people uploading, of course, THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT, which is why its not happening…

            When there is money in pursuing infringing up-loaders, then there will be a reason to supply the demand, otherwise by making the child porn public at least they could build dossiers on the sickos checking it out, just so long as they draw the line, which they dont, but thats a whole other debate…

          • Anonymous

            as ive said time and time again, Google ain’t the problem, its a red herring, the industry and the riaa etc. just want them to be the fall guy and the industries eyes all light up with dollar signs when they see their bank accounts and figure that some of it is rightfully theirs, the same industry that belittles and hammers and spits and pisses on those coming up or those who arent in their beds as being dreamers who feel entitled to a living, funny thing with them is, they are always looking for fall guys, tsk tsk…

          • Anonymous

            let us also not forget, that due diligence is important, and a snap reaction to a problem that could very well possibly be proliferated by the same people screaming for change must be looked into, we cannot make such massive changes until everyone can be totally sure of all the layers…

            i mean, vivendi is sitting on billions in cash, in CASH, do you know how hard that is?? and the top artists are raking it in, so something doesn’t quite add up across the board up down and all around…

            there are stories out there of these companies uploading their own damn property for piracy, how many of their top artists got in on megaupload?

            i dont know, something funky is going on, all i care about is finding ways to make money that fit with my ideals and values and work within my limitations and that i can enjoy somewhat, music aint it, obviously…

        • Versus

          So the villain is big and strong.

          We need a powerful force to bring him down.

          This may have to involve the US govt, or the EU. They could humble other monopolies; they can humble this technodystopia.

          • Sarah

            Most likely true that they could. But will they, especially on behalf of the music industry against the tech giants? The EU seems to be more promising on that score, in any case.

  6. Me2

    The fact remains that Google search points to pirate sites while YouTube hosts infringing videos and runs income generating ads against them, as well as terrorist propaganda videos and sex tourism ads, all the while claiming safe harbor provisions while deploying a massive lobby and blocking investigation.

    Regardless of whatever ideological model is spread around campus, or as to the intentions their model, these are the cold hard facts of what is going on at ground level. I’ll leave it to others to decide if that is a problem or not.

    • Anonymous

      “Google Search points to pirate sites while YouTube hosts infringing videos and runs income generating ads against them”

      Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

      Safe harbor is a 20th Century joke.

      • FarePlay

        Isn’t it time to end Safe Harbor protection for pirate sites?

        Take Down > Stay Down.

  7. Al

    Last time i’ve seen that many stars in one room, they were recording WE ARE THE WORLD!

  8. David

    To all the Google apologists, I suggest they study Google’s policy on *spam*. It’s kinda difficult to find it directly on Google’s own website, but if you search (on Google or other search engines) for ‘Google fighting spam’ you should find it. It’s odd (or maybe not!) that they don’t publicise it more, because you would think that ‘fighting spam’ is such a good thing, right? But maybe they are embarrassed that when it comes to spam, Google does cheerfully and voluntarily all the things that they claim are impossible, ineffective, harmful to freedom of speech, etc, etc, when it comes to piracy. For example, in February 2011, “We increased enforcement of a policy to take action on free hosting services and dynamic DNS providers when a large fraction of their sites or pages violate our Webmaster Guidelines. This allows us to protect our users from seeing spam, when taking action on the individual spammy accounts would be impractical”. Just substitute “copyright infringement” for “spam” in this text, and you will see what Google can do when they want to: which means when it is in their own commercial interest. But when it is against their commercial interest, oh no, that would break the internet!

  9. ecosystem for content creators

    Hi everyone,
    i’m currently developing a new platform intended for musicians to form a community around content creation, where we can financially support each other by collaborating and remixing each others works online, and then pay each other for stem downloads and project mixdowns.

    In light of the recent debates over Tidal and trying to find ways for middle class musicians to earn money for their work, i’d like to throw out my companys pitch to you and see what you think about what we’re offering:

    Who are we?:
    We are a crowdsourced music platform that allows amateur and professional musicians to collaborate, remix, and monetize their original works online.

    What do we know? :
    Music simply means more to people who create it. Rather than focusing our efforts on convincing music listeners to pay for music, we are finding ways for creators to support each other by doing what they love best; making music.

    What is our mission?:
    To establish sustainable revenue streams through collaboration and content creation.

    We offer 3 value propositions:

    1) Collaborate: We enable artists to collaborate more efficiently by crowdsourcing musical ideas online. Users can simply upload pieces of a song, then have others build unto it by uploading or recording their own sounds below the project ‘source track’.

    2) Remix: By incorporating beat matching technology that enables sounds of different speeds and pitches to match instantaneously; we’re leveling the playing field for all creators, and opening the doors for a multitude of cross genre ideas.

    3) Monetize: Through micro-transactions for stem downloads and project mix-downs; musicians have an ability to generate revenue from their contributions, remixes, and shared works.

    Encompassing all of these great features is an innovative copyright system that is seamlessly integrated into our social platform; providing maximum control for our original creators, yet reasonable flexibility for our remixers.

    Overall our mission is to establish an open and collaborative culture amongst professional and amateur musicians, making it easier than ever for you to monetize your songs from every stage of the creative process. We believe that this platform can become a new ecosystem for content creators.

    I would really like to get your feedback. Would you use this platform? (Why or why not?), What are the most important features you would need to use this platform?


  10. Sarah

    Hear, hear.

    We want individual users to be your paying customers, and a business doesn’t get far by fighting with its customers (some notable exceptions, as have been pointed out by my friend Anonymous, but this is pretty solid as a rule). Instead, fight …. er, the system? 🙂

    Sounds silly to put it that way, but systemic problems call for systemic solutions. Individual users pirating are symptoms, not the underlying problems. That’s why going after individual users is at best a never-ending game of whack-a-mole: get rid of one and another pops up, because you only treated a symptom instead of the problems causing that symptom.

    • Anonymous

      ,i>Sounds silly to put it that way, but systemic problems call for systemic solutions. Individual users pirating are symptoms, not the underlying problems. That’s why going after individual users is at best a never-ending game of whack-a-mole: get rid of one and another pops up, because you only treated a symptom instead of the problems causing that symptom.

      The individual up-loader is precisely the problem, the music industries idea that going after youtube google was the play only goes to further highlight their lacking understanding and poor business acumen…

      The digital network is the underlying problem, not some server business…

      Fix the network, fix the problem, unfortunately it wont happen, so instead the music business decides its best lobbying efforts are on attacking google?? Thats sillyness…

    • Anonymous

      “That’s why going after individual users is at best a never-ending game of whack-a-mole: get rid of one and another pops up

      And that’s a beautiful business opportunity, Sarah — just use a good anti-piracy service to monetize the suckers (or start one, hint, hint).

      Again, every crowd has a silver lining…

      ) The real Anonymous 🙂

      • Anonymous

        …and while we’re at it:

        “Nearly 5,000 Australians may soon be receiving letters from Hollywood demanding damages for illegally downloading the film ‘Dallas Buyers Club’.

        In a landmark ruling, the Federal Court has ordered iiNet, Dodo, Internode and three smaller internet service providers to hand over the personal details of customers who allegedly illegally downloaded the film.”

        SOURCE: (I’ll post the link in a comment below.)

        🙂 The real Anonymous 🙂

          • Anonymous

            Oh, no evil smile.

            🙁 The real Anonymous 🙁

        • Sarah

          Awesome 🙂

          You know that I don’t object to fighting piracy, or making people who steal pay for their thefts. I’d probably sue if it were my work and I thought I could get money out of them.

          My issue is about overall effectiveness. Sure you can make a few people pay settlements, but is it enough to justify the cost or do anything to actually solve the problem going forward?

          Some links to articles about the effectiveness of suing individual users in a separate comment.

          • Anonymous

            “you can make a few people pay settlements, but is it enough to justify the cost”

            Sorry Sarah, but you’ve got it all wrong.

            This is about monetizing piracy!

            Modern anti-piracy services like Rightscorp hunt pirates for free! So you have nothing to lose as an artist.

            And yes, independent artists can indeed use their services — it’s incredibly easy: Just give them a list of the compositions/master recordings you own, and they’ll send notices to the thieves.

            Pirates pay $20 per song — unless they want to go to court — and you get 50%.

            🙂 The real Anonymous 🙂

          • Sarah

            Go for it – there’s no reason for an artist NOT to use a site like Rightscorp. But is Rightscorp making enough money to stay in business?

            From a recent article (link below):
            “Newly released earnings numbers show that Rightscorp is contacting more people than ever before, fining more people for infringement than ever before, working with more ISPs than ever before—and yet is reporting record losses. Its stock is near all-time lows at about $0.11 per share.”

            More importantly:
            “Rightscorp’s newest 10-K filing notes that the company has no source of revenue that’s sufficient to allow it to “continue as a going concern.”

            So absolutely, use it while it’s there – because of the way they pay, it’s almost silly not to use them. But is it a long term solution? We’ll see, right?

          • Anonymous

            Your source seems to be ArsTechnica so that’s hardly relevant. There’s a reason that Rightscorp is one of the most hated services among pirates right now, you know.

            But feel free to add an even better anti-piracy feature to RepX — it would be a major selling point!

            😉 The real Anonymous 😉

          • Sarah

            Well, you can’t ignore facts just because someone you don’t like is saying them. 😛 ArsTechnica’s source was Rightscorp’s own SEC filing, which is fairly good as sources go. As quoted below, straight from Rightscorp’s filing:

            “We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Rightscorp, Inc. as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flows for the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

            We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

            In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Rightscorp, Inc. as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

            The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in the Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company does not generate sufficient revenue to sustain operations and has negative cash flows from operations. This raises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

            HJ Associates & Consultants, LLP
            Salt Lake City, UT
            March 9, 2015″

            The direct link to the SEC filing follows.

          • Anonymous

            I’ll be worried the day these stories go away. And I certainly never said I didn’t like the piracy press. I love it.

            But again: Anti-piracy is an essential part of any release strategy today in the real world. So why don’t you add a Rightscorp alternative to your service? Perhaps you can come up with an even better model?

            I’ve always thought they should charge considerably more than $20, for instance. Consider the pirate’s alternative: $150,000 per infringement…

            🙂 The real Anonymous 🙂

          • Sarah

            Because I’m not sold on its potential for long-term profitability as a business, at least as implemented. We’re looking at offering anti-piracy products from a different angle, which would supplement but not substitute what they do. Their services complement ours and we benefit from their success to the extent that it means artists get more control over their content. So I like them, I’m just not sure that it’s a viable business.

            Do any of the others demand higher payments from users?

          • Anonymous

            “we benefit from their success”

            And you should never forget that.

            “Do any of the others demand higher payments from users?”

            No, most of them just send takedowns so the artist doesn’t have to do it.

          • Sarah

            Yep, we’re on it. There’s no single magic solution to the problems of “free” and piracy – it’ll most likely be a number of factors and developments that result in meaningful reduction of those problems. That’s why I’m all in favor of many options being tested and explored, from Videscape to Rightscorp.

            Speaking of “free,” I’m super excited to be able to tell you what we’re doing with ads in a few days. We came up with something that could realistically result in higher ad prices – and therefore in greater revenue to artists from ad-supported content. 🙂

          • Anonymous

            “I’m super excited to be able to tell you what we’re doing with ads in a few days. We came up with something that could realistically result in higher ad prices – and therefore in greater revenue to artists from ad-supported content.”

            Greater than what? 🙂

            Seriously, that’s interesting.

          • Sarah

            Greater than the per stream payouts currently generated from the ad revenue on YouTube, Spotify, etc. And it’s not guaranteed to – it’s new, we’d have to see how it goes – but it’s very possible (even probable) based on the economics of the model we’re implementing.

            And I think you’re going to love it, real Anonymous 🙂

          • Anonymous

            “real Anonymous”

            How can you tell? 🙂 This is so exciting that I forgot my fancy signature.

            But again: It’s not just about the money.

            The single most important factor today is virality.

            More openness and less Pyongyang wouldn’t hurt, either.

          • Anonymous

            …oh, and the Pyongyang part was obvioiusly aimed at YouTube, not you.

          • Sarah

            Virality is up to you, champ. Our job is to give you a system that works in the ways you want. In this instance, that means “ad-supported with lots of opportunities for people to share.” Your job is to get people to actually choose to share your content (mostly by producing awesome, shareable content). Seems like a fair division of responsibilities, yes? 🙂

          • Anonymous

            “Virality is up to you”

            Yes, if your videos can be embedded on Twitter and Facebook.

            “Seems like a fair division of responsibilities, yes?”

            Not even close — but it’ll have to do. 🙂

          • Anonymous

            This is about monetizing piracy!

            Modern anti-piracy services like Rightscorp hunt pirates for free! So you have nothing to lose as an artist.

            And yes, independent artists can indeed use their services — it’s incredibly easy: Just give them a list of the compositions/master recordings you own, and they’ll send notices to the thieves.

            Pirates pay $20 per song — unless they want to go to court — and you get 50%.

            And when you say Pirate you mean the uploader right? The one making the property available, right?

            Or do you mean the lonely individual just looking to listen to some music for pleasure, either too poor or else too confused by the plethora of misinformation, media and propaganda to understand the big picture of it all else possibly lead down a path that has them believing something false? In that case wouldnt other things be smarter to clean up, wouldnt education, the proper kind, be a better long term solution, as opposed to the continued bullying threatening fear mongering?

            The industries complete total continued blinder focus on downloaders, with seemingly zero care or effort to go after those who make the property available by uploading, leaves me rather suspicious as to why…

            In my jurisdiction, while always changing, it had been well known to not heed the threats of copyright trolls, and the courts and judges came to a unified decision that infringing downloaders would only have to pay for the cost of the download, so one song would be the $.99…

            Depending on Jurisdiction and the precedents set, rightscorp seems like it could be nothing more then an extortionist type business and a bully threat business, as at least in my jurisdiction $20 is way more then the courts would hand down, based on precedents…

            All i can hope is that the courts and legislation do not concede to the corporate powers and the copyright trolls, as the problem is with the uploaders way more then the downloader, as well as the digital network and of course other things… Create a poor system, bypass the true thief and the uploader, and just punish only the downloader, it reeks to me, something smells real fishy with all this…

            I could bring a ton of money into my jurisdiction if i could get the proper people and companies to pay from the theft that i am suffering from, and i could let them all off the hook for any downloading for listening pleasure they did, as that is peanuts to where the real losses and problems are stemming from…

            All that being said i am unfamiliar with rightscorp and am only proliferating what i know and regarding the jurisdiction i reside in…

            Meanwhile major labels are making billions in revenues…

  11. Anonymous

    Finally, the discussion is right where is needs to be, Google/Youtube. They are THE major problem right now for the music industry.

    And you speak for and represent the whole music industry?

    They are not the problem, they are part of the solution…

    You do realize that before youtube music videos were a straight expenditure? You are aware, that never before could you directly monetize a music video, and now with YouTube, many artists and labels are actually making a direct profit from their music videos?

    How is that the biggest problem in the music business? That is freaking INCREDIBLE!!! So they industry slags off MTV, then slags off the death of the radio star, then slags off this and slags off that, and now, finally someone is figuring out ways to get money for views and streams in a day and age when its so easy to get anything digital for free, and the music industry STILL slags them off?

    What do yall want? Yall must be stooped in your own misery unable to pull yourselves out of the deep dark abyss, stuck in someones hell over something, its pretty much unbelievable…

    Google isn’t the internet, they didnt build all the wires and cables, they are just a business wtih a bunch of servers, how they are the evil pirating bad guy for the music industry is beyond me… They have helped shine a light on things, and without the people using the technology to scam and screw people, then it wouldnt be any issue at all…

    People are the issue, plain and simple…

    Yall are just the same little indy etc. circles and possibly middle-manning people making money off of who actually make the music, perhaps the riaa execs raking it in seeing the days of massive vinyl and cd sales revenue coming to an end and finding anyway to ensure they continue to get paid hundreds of thousand of dollars a year for doing SFA, and yall are worried that you will be milk-manned to extinction, due to total redundancy…

    The music industry is its own biggest problem, with such a skint and wee tiny small potato cottage industry, it spends most its time infighting and dealing with its own peoples dysfunction, its pathetic, no regulation, no governing body, no ethics, no honor, no valor, no honesty, no respect…

  12. Anonymous

    “Finally, the discussion is right where it needs to be, Google/Youtube. They are THE major problem right now for the music industry”

    Spot on!

    “The music industry like any industry can tolerate a small percentage of total usage being pirated, stolen, disappearing or whatever you want to call it. But no industry can survive the amount that is now and has been occurring in the music industry. I think things are starting to turn around.”

    And here’s what we all can do:

    Use one or more of these cheap and brilliant services to hunt, punish and monetize pirates:

    * Toppletrack
    * Audiolock
    * Digitalrightscorp
    * Nukepiracy
    * Muso

    🙂 The real Anonymous 🙂

      • Anonymous

        It’s a work in progress.
        😐 The real Anonymous 😉

    • Anonymousser

      Yeah, that worked so great at the beginning of the century.

      • Anonymous

        Um no, anti-piracy didn’t work at all back then.

        But it does today! We have lots of cheap or free anti-piracy services now, and it would be suicide not to use them — especially during release week/month.

        Best part?

        Everybody can easily monetize pirates today!

        (Please see my Rightscorp comment elsewhere in this thread.)

        🙂 The real Anonymous 🙂

  13. Anonymous

    The only exclusivity that exists on the internet is ownership.