Last week, Da
mien Kulash of "OK Go" wrote an insightful Op-ed for the New York Times about the British record label EMI's restrictions on the streaming of music videos. Here is a synopsis:
Kulash began by citing OK Go's 2006 video entitled "Here It Goes Again" that the group self-produced and posted on YouTube (devoid from their contract). At the time, EMI saw the video as free advertising and had no reason to argue with it (especially after the video accumulated tens of millions of views). However, this occurred at the time record companies were diving inadvertently into their infamous tailspin. From floundering record sales came a demand to be paid for each stream of their material on YouTube. They were on a short-sighted track to find sources of revenue without regarding long term business. Unfortunately, a crucial fact of the deal that EMI (and other record companies) agreed to was that they may only be paid for streams that take place on YouTube's own site. Not on the band's website. Not on anyone else's web site. As a result of this exclusivity, the material can not be spread and enjoyed on a scale even remotely as large as it used to be.
When this deal went into effect, views of the OK Go video immediately dropped 90%, from 10,000 per day to 1,000. Their royalty statement from six months of streaming came to a mere $27.77. News reports claim that the labels receive between $.004 and $.008 per stream from YouTube. "So the most EMI could have grossed for the streams in question is a little over $5,400" Kulash explained. Hardly an ideal outcome for both parties after the initially successful propagation of the video helped increase OK Go's fan base and make a profit for EMI.
It is decisions like these that will truly lead the majors into extinction.
View the full text here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/opinion/20kulash.html?scp=1&sq=damien%20kulash&st=cse
