by Mike Masnick
Wed, Jun 30th 2010 3:17am
The New York Times is reporting that music licensing firm Rumblefish is trying to help people making YouTube videos avoid takedowns or the dreaded YouTube ContentID "silencing" by offering music that can be licensed for YouTube videos at $1.99 per song (for non-commercial purposes only). While it's at least somewhat good to see music licensing firms recognizing that this market isn't going to buy hugely expensive licenses, and trying to adjust to handle this new market, it sort of ignores the fact that there are still a ton of Creative Commons and similarly licensed (or public domain) music out there that they can use. Since the Rumblefish catalog in this offer doesn't include any major label music or "big name" artists, it seems like those who might be interested in such a thing could probably find just as good, if not better, Creative Commons-licensed music. On top of that, this is the same Rumblefish who caused some problems last year when it claimed licensing rights over some public domain music, pissing off a bunch of YouTube users.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Top RIAA Exec: There's No More Music In Africa And The Middle East Because They Need Stronger Copyright
- Another GOP Candidate Indirectly Promotes Bernie Sanders By Not Getting Music Cleared With Artist
- UK Publishers Don't See Why Anyone's Complaining About Copyright Law
- How Rumblefish Ended Up Claiming Copyright On A Song Uploaded By The Band Who Actually Held The Copyright
- Rumblefish CEO: Claiming Copyright On Your Incidental Recordings Of Birds Was Merely A Series Of Unfortunate Errors