FOR WHOM THE BELLS TOLL
YouTube strikes another potentially revenue-making deal with Warner, continuing the phenomena of traditional media playing nice with the service (see my earlier post). As this AP story explains:
"Warner Music Group Corp. has agreed to distribute and license its copyrighted songs and other material through online video trendsetter YouTube Inc., marking another significant step in the entertainment industry's migration to the Internet.
Under a revenue-sharing deal announced Monday, New York-based Warner Music has agreed to transfer thousands of its music videos and interviews to YouTube..."
TechCrunch reminds us that:
"That could get interesting. Warner’s last experiment on YouTube, the Paris Hilton channel - was widely seen as a failure."
And Mark Cuban, who knows something about video over the internet, thinks this is YouTube's last hurrah before oblivion. Why? Because for him it's Napster deja vu:
"This so reminds me of the early days of Napster. They were the first to tell you it wasnt illegal. They didnt host anything but an index to link to all the illegal downloaders. Youtube doesnt upload anything illegal and will take down whatever you ask them to. Sounds legit right ?
On the Warner/YouTube announcement today, he notes:
"In fact its reminds me of when Bertelsman cut a deal with Napster. It sure sounded nice, but didnt amount to much of anything."
His post is worth reading in it's entirety.
In a post a few days ago, I'd posited:
"the needle for the media companies has moved more to greed this time around vs. from fear the last time around."
In an earlier post, I'd pointed out that YouTube was benefiting hugely from:
"the vacuum created by the relative lack of a wide, deep, affordable, and fast-growing inventory of video content from the traditional media companies.
All the while, YouTube continues to benefit from the float of it's copyright infringing content.
It'll be interesting to see how long traditional media stands for it.
Comments