Soundcloud Getting Sued

Posts 1 - 25 of 34
  1. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I read online at the BBC news this past week about soundcloud being sued for copy write issues. They have failed to protect some of their members. The article was short, I read it quickly and I haven't been able to find anything since.

    Anyone else have more info on this?

  2. 588276
    StaticNomad : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    This was an easy find, don't know if it's what you're after.

  3. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    That's the ticket. Let people read the article and see what people say. A HEALTHY discussion would be nice.

    I would like to hear what some knowledgeable people have to say about this. Does this affect us in any way or could it down the road.

  4. 111346
    Planetjazzbass : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Good luck with having a healthy discussion mate,I wouldn't hold my breath though...As far as the litigation issue is concerned, I've never considered DJ's to own any material let alone the copyrights, needless to say this is predicated from my antiquated view of a Disc Jockey being someone that plays other people's material, I'm well aware of the changing status of DJ's seemingly having morphed into artists in their own for the future and any implications for Looperman, I do know one thing, only sue those who can afford to pay...that's pretty much everyone here I guess.

  5. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I thought I read in the article that soundcould(no that is not a typo) had some agreements with some publishing houses to use their content for remixes and such projects. I am not saying Shan would take that route but if he did that could change things for many around here.

  6. 111346
    Planetjazzbass : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Creators is mentioned many times,plus deals in place..what that means exactly is anyone's guess.

  7. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Soundcloud - "We are working hard to create a platform where all creators can be paid for their work, and already have deals in place with thousands of copyright owners, including record labels, publishers and independent artists."

    This is the statement I was referring to Dave. Not sure how to interpret this. What does he mean by "deals"? Is content available to share? They seem to be allowing a bit of sharing over there. Can independent artists use published material supplied by soundcloud under such conditions? The article is vague regarding these. And if so can these things happen here?

    That is what I would like someone to fill me in on. It could open up opportunities for some people if remixing specific content outside of the loop was allowed.

  8. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Hmmmmm, this seems like a tricky one from a legal perspective. The users that pay for pro accounts don't pay to stream other people's work.. they pay to get more upload time, see stats about their listeners and a little orange star next to their name.

    I understand Soundcloud to be mostly a promotional site and every artist knows the score when they upload their music. If artists want to sell their songs then they include links that allow listeners to buy the track...

    I'm not quite sure what the issue is here..?

    If PRS's complaint is about the community uploading DJ mixes for people to download, then fair enough.. but I'm pretty sure soundcloud limits the downloads to only a couple of hundred per uploaded file anyway? It's hardly a place where piracy is rampant..

    What exactly is PRS's problem?

  9. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I would assume from sampling their works without permission and PRS not getting their cut.

  10. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I think I'm still missing the angle you're trying to probe Wayne.

    So, for example.. I have made some remixes and uploaded them to soundcloud, which I didn't obtain prior permission for. So technically I'm infringing copy write..

    Is your line of thinking that PRS wants Soundcloud to pay PRS's members because of people like me?

  11. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I am not trying to probe any angle.

    I am only saying that if you have your music registered under certain publishing rights and someone plays your music the artist/publisher are entitled to money. If someone, anyone, anywhere uses it you are entitled to get paid if that is how your publishing rights are set up. Permission is required to use it. It seems people at sc are using PRS material without PRS's permission and thus not getting their legal money.

    That's all. I am looking to see if maybe someone from sc might knbow something or someone from bmi or ascap or prs might be able to jump in and share some insight into this.

  12. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    "it is not remunerating our members when their music is streamed by the SoundCloud platform."

    this is the comment by PRS on which I would sum up the lawsuit in the article.

  13. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I would assume that PRS would consider sampling of any part of the song to be streaming as in a remix.

  14. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    *Think* I'm starting to understand now :)

    So if PRS win the law suit, I'm guessing that would open the flood gates and would set a huge precedent for music sites everywhere.. good news for the little guy that isn't backed by mega labels

  15. 308224
    theHumps : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Maybe by getting a deal between music sharing sites and artists/publishers would result in the use of more material for remixes in a legit way with no worries for the original artist or the remixer. To me it would clarify a lot of things between all parties.

    I don't know all the facts here and what each side is looking to get. I find it interesting though. Here we can't use any copy written material. But if there were a way to get permission through sites like PRS that would be pretty cool to many people here. But that would come at a price. You mentioned sc has paying artists so money would come into play here as well and and Shan probably doesn't want the headache, can't say I blame him.

    Why sc is refusing to come to an agreement with PRS and protect the original artists publishing rights is the question there I think.

  16. 630386
    JoeFunktastic : Sat 5th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    A similar scenario like this has already played out with some powerful players last year Wayne. The Google vs. Viacom Copyright-Infringement Lawsuit over YouTube for $1.65 Billion USD. Viacom did not get a penny from the lawsuit considering it owns the DAILY SHOW, SPONGE BOB, MTV and SOUTH PARK to name a few. No Money was awarded to Viacom from Google? Google's lawyer fought hard and found some protection under the internationally recognized Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

    For Viacom vs.Google, take down notices must be issued first because Google said it was unable to verify if some of its members actually had valid licenses for the copyright material. You cannot just do a massive takedown without a notice first. So as a result Viacom has more direct access to Youtube now. It participates in the YouTube Content ID program to locate copyrighted material uploaded to the Youtube servers by members. Have you ever got the " You are not authorized to play this video from your country" message? They are also blocking content by country too but not necessarily taking everything down.

    I suspect the same for SoundCloud. Take down notices to DJ's and more internal access for original copyright owners eventually. Possibly a fine too. Most people are not surprised by the SoundCloud litigation Wayne. It really is not news as many had suspect some legal action was eventually inevitable anyways. If SoundCloud abruptly closed up shop, now that would be very news worthy.

  17. 308224
    theHumps : Sun 6th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Hey Joe, I don't know anything about the you tube suit let alone much about this one. I just threw it out there and hoped someone had more info.

    But if people who have their music established in a publishing house and are legally eligible to get money for plays are having issues about money with sc than imagine the poor slob who isn't registered and has an issue with sc. What are his chances of getting his money?

    What if one of your songs got sampled and someone over there made some cash off it. You aren't registered are you? Would sc come running to your rescue? Does the article make you feel like they would?

    Honestly Joe, it's made me think more about registering my music to protect myself and not allowing downloads. If this is the direction music hosting sites are going in treating it's members this way than so be it. 5 years, no deal?? Who do they think they are, congress? lol

    That is why I brought it up, the what if factor. There are many people here who go over there. I threw this up because it brought up some questions.

  18. 630386
    JoeFunktastic : Sun 6th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Howdy there Wayne! Well the sad reality Wayne is SoundCloud really doesn't get a lot of love from the real members on this site, just the drive-by posters here looking to grow their base! People post links here while really only caring about their following on SC. We give SoundCloud a lot of props here, but really it is a system that sort of backfilled the need of posting one's music after MySpace died. S.C. is just a social media sound platform site and that is all whereas ReverbNation is geared more towards real artist promotion, development and professional exposure.

    But people will continue to go to SC for props and followings, and for stealing music of course. When that is said and done, they will all flock to the next big thing. The real darkside of all of this Wayne is you can buy fake SoundCloud followers by paying a company to juice up your stats. That's crazy! We give SC more credit than they deserve. Something has to give.

    Btw Wayne, I just assumed you were already ASCAP and BMI protected considering the amazing effort you put into your music.

  19. 498019
    Tumbleweed : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Aside from the merits or lack thereof of this particular a matter of principal I have little sympathy for internet business who retain personal information and/or property and then have them ripped....if they had to pay the consequences security could reach a new an aside...Google your artist name along with the words will likely find anything you have on Sound Cloud is duplicated there (including graphics) and available for free download (even if you do not permit downloads)..I did..and a few others I know....and you cant contact them as the site has no contact that actually works....they will exist as somebody else in the near future...forget security...there isn`t any..and copyright doesn`t matter..what you post is available to whoever may want it....makes me ant to hit delete on everything...but I wont..its too much fun..Ed

  20. 285149
    vigwig : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    @Tumbleweed: "It's to much fun": I think that is my point. My music is just amateur hour. I enjoy making it and the good feeling when people play it or download it. If they can make any money off it by sampling it or something, power to 'em. My music is all loops (including Joe's Wayne's and PJB's (Dave=PJB?). If they sample my music it's rally sampling their loops or Sony's or 100 Free Loops' or Soundbible's. Or even my loops! If they want my vocals, they're crazy anyway, LOL. Vic

  21. 308224
    theHumps : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    That post was reassuring Ed, ha!

    I know what you mean. I enjoy sharing my music for free. To me it is about exposure and getting yourself out there. People love anything free, matter of fact it's my favorite kind of beer.

    You use a publishing service for some of your music, don't you Ed? Is that for the commercial stuff you do? If so, do you keep music like that off sites like sc and even here? For this very reason?

    Just curious.

  22. 630386
    JoeFunktastic : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    "My music is just amateur hour."

    Hey Vic! Stop your bragging and Grandstanding! Ah ha ha! No, Vic, man your music comes from the heart man. What you do cannot be put into words that us mere mortals could comprehend. From your fabulous radio shows, entertaining music and compelling sense of humor, you are a class act worth mentioning here, Mixposure, Facebook and everywhere else. Keep up the awesome work there Mr.Vic! Joe

  23. 285149
    vigwig : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    Thanks and I'll have what you're quaffing.

  24. 498019
    Tumbleweed : Mon 7th Sep 2015 : 6 years ago

    I used to have a bunch of compositions catalogued with Pump Audio (Getty`s Images), but haven`t listed anything since they changes their corp structure. Its an alternative to the more usual commercial route but anyone who wants to make it a serious venture needs to have a few 1000 compositions in a wide variety of genres in their catalogue and pay attention to what kind of music is getting current use by advertisers, film, tv etc...I never had much luck but did manage to place a few on my own for things like tourism ads, local store ads backing mixes etc...(I used to have a small website when I was doing a bit of recording for others...took it down a few years back).
    If you are interested in playing around with the concept a bit there is a site called YouLicense that allows you to post & deal directly with any interested parties. A lot of the stuff is small projects, people looking for free music for videos, requests for in-store music, small films, compilations etc. I can`t vouch for the site at all..looks a bit iffy....
    You are right Wayne..I haven`t posted anything that I actually catalogued or placed usually (there may have been one). But I`m not paying any attention to that any more as I`m just doing the fun stuff in the last couple of years and my hearing tells me thats my niche now (HaHa).
    I still have a few tunes registered with BMI. If you come up with some compositions you think have potential, it never hurts to register them with whatever professional service you is also a backup for those times you have someone else claiming your tracks or reposting under another name and representing as their own (I have hit that one a couple of times)....
    I don`t know if artists will even really be protected. They sure aren`t now.

  25. 1245534
    VirginiaSlimm : Thu 5th Nov 2015 : 6 years ago

    My experience with soundcloud has been pretty good so far. they have responded promptly to my violation letters and treated me correctly.
    What I really get out of that linked article is that Adele wears so much makeup, she probably has neck problems from the sheer weight of it all. -and might be a fire hazard. Pipes for days though. pipes to rattle the foundations, the foundation layer at least.
    AND because I say nothing of value yet...
    PRS doesn't care about Adele, PRS cares about keeping their slice and not becoming obsolete. They like to keep track of all plays everywhere like gods, then give all the spendo to the five big stars and tell the smaller acts "good job! you were on the RADIO!".
    Good luck PRS. The internet is all about making old structures redundant.I predict that these mega-dino-c@nt organizations are going to be replaced by php scripted websites(hopes) when the nerds with guitars get mad enough. I mean, how many birds need to be on the rhino's back really?

Posts 1 - 25 of 34

 ! You need to Log In or Register to post here.