This isn’t just about the Don Henley and him blocking Eagle songs so I figured I’d start a new thread.
He makes some really good points about the bands who block which I totally agree with. Do you think Bands who block are becoming less popular?
This isn’t just about the Don Henley and him blocking Eagle songs so I figured I’d start a new thread.
Haven’t watched the video…but if true, I would think it would be pretty obvious from their play counts on the streaming services.
Speaking for myself…now, when I hear an Eagles song, I think “oh yeah, that’s the band that has millionaire douchebag Don Henley messing up the learning process for beginning guitar players, who only love his music…just so he can earn a few more pennies in royalties”
I’ve always been sort of indifferent to the Eagle’s music, but now I’m starting to actively dislike them.
I’ve not watched this video but am wondering about the difference in blocking vs a copyright claim.
As I understand it, when I post a cover and it is picked up by YT and receives a copyright claim in the checking process then any money earned from plays of my video would be paid to the copyright holder.
I assume then that if Eagles songs were not blocked but flagged with a copyright claim then the holder … Henley … would receive money earned. Maybe not as much as a royalty when streamed but would still earn money?
Am I misunderstanding?
And I expect Beato makes a point that if people watch a JustinGuitar lesson they may well go on to listen to the original on a streaming service?
I suppose the real issue is all the uploaded albums you can find on YouTube that may only generate money if channels are monetised, which as I said may be less than what is earned when streamed?
A very interesting video.
Thanks for posting it, @stitch
I wonder if we have to worry about other tutorials, too?
There are some songs of the Beatles, Guns 'n Roses and AC/DC on my want-to-play-someday-wishlist.
One thing that is for sure is how small-minded bands who block are going to miss out big time on having fans learn how to play decent covers of their songs.
An interesting video. Thanks for posting, Rick.
It got me thinking about those artists that have a different outlook on things. Kyle Gass had the outlook of wanting to provide accurate tutorials for his Tenacious D songs like Tribute so he provided lessons on his Guitaring YouTube Channel. Let’s face it outside of Justin there is a lot of ordinary folk teaching songs on their YouTube channels inaccurately.
A few years ago BBC Radio One had a music learning series where artists taught viewers how to play their hit songs. Most of the artists I wasn’t familiar with but one or two I recognised the song. The two that really captured my attention were Finneas - Let’s Fall In Love for the Night and Biffy Clyro - Many of Horror.
The one thing that really stood out to me in relation to this thread was in the Finneas lesson he says “it’s been such a treat to hear you cover this song and I can’t wait to see what you do with this new found information”.
I think those blocking outright have forgot where they came from and how they got where they are today and the joy it brings to hear those that have enjoyed your music learn to play something you wrote playing oasis in front of noel gallagher
It would be a nice little addition to the playground area for Justin to have a few of those acts that want their fans to learn how to play their songs on Justin’s sofa teaching him how to play them and discuss how the songs were written.
Watch the video Rick Beato explains the difference and the consequences of both Blocking which Don Henley does with his songs (not all Eagle songs only the ones he’s written) and copyright strikes.
I know Justin had to take down all the Guns and Roses tutorials about 10 years ago but come to some sort of agreement that worked for both parties but it took years. But with Don Henley he won’t budge you must take song down. The good news is he only has the power to do this on songs he wrote not all Eagle songs
That are some good news. Thanks for the background information
This sort of thing is only going to get worse before it gets better. I’m sure at some point an even larger number of cover songs across the board will get blocked. Count on AI being very effective at scanning the Googlesphere. This is another reason to find your own voice on the instrument.
some good points he makes in the video. IMHO - artists (who have every right to block) are driving themselves into irrelevancy. blocking ‘how-to’ vids seems ridiculous because it keeps newer generations from learning the music. what are they afraid of? that some kid learning to play “hotel california” or “life in the fast lane” is gonna form a cover band long after henley is in the dirt might make enough money to pay for gas to get to a show at a small bar in the middle of nowhere? the kids interested in learning these songs will just move on to other bands and forget about these guys. seems the most logical step for them to take if the blocking continues. just my .02
I’ve watched the video and found it to be quite general on the implication on the longevity of the artists who block, his frustration, but not into the nitty gritty details of the difference, particularly the financial aspect.
I suppose it depends on who owns the music. It’s easy to think of it as “bands” but music is owned by someone who has the rights to it in our crazy world. I’m totally opposed to the idea that anything sound related ought to have rights to begin with. How many times does one want to be paid for something when the creator of something tangible can only ever sell it once? Music is an inherent gift to us, and we don’t seem to respect that it is in our common interest to to not start commodifying vibrations of identifiable frequencies. When we do so we start to act like assholish capitalists, and that is a one of the problems of our world. Rent this, pay access for that…it’s all in an effort to give meaning to existing wealth and what it means to have power over others. Play music, give it away, receive it. Teach others. Let’s all play music together. You didn’t have to pay to be created by your parents. The “bad actors” here are being driven by non musical concerns. I feel sad when I see anyone trying to cash in big with music. That’s going to lead to a value distorted life, imo. Its not a realistic way to have things. “To the victor the spoils” comes with social problems. I don’t particularly like attempts to shame people into doing what is decent with a capitalist rationale of “you are hurting your brand”. Rick Beato is one of those who’s made a buck selling “photocopies” over and over. He is a poor voice for the commons from where I stand. Imo. His content is something he can try his luck peddling on Youtube. We’ve glorified that to the point where people are ok with it.
BTW, I have greatly loved your free content Stitch. It’s made my world a better place. It makes me want to give too. I grow food for a living and there’s no free lunch here. One has to do what one feels he has to do. I will tell you that real tangible food commodities are near worthless, and you can only sell them once. I couldn’t care less about band images and the cult of personalities. There’s plenty to listen to. End of rant.
Interesting ideas. Personally, when I started to buy CDs in the 2000s, which have always been on the expensive side here in Hungary, I used to think “How come musicians/artists don’t sell their works more cheaply? Don’t they want them to be enjoyed by as many people as possible?” And for a few years I downloaded quite a lot of music from various sources.
But the more I think about it, the less I can blame artists and labels for curbing free access to their products. While I’d like to agree with you that “music is an inherent gift to us”, I think it’s true only in the most physical sense of vibrations transmitted though the air. Actual music (or most art), in my opinion, doesn’t come about by happy accidents but requires some sort of preparation, practice and creative work. These people devote their time, inspiration and energy into creating something that is basically a product like anything else from food through furniture to cars. It’s only reasonable that they expect a return on investment, whether it’s by selling their music and restricting (free) access to it, or giving the music away for free and using it as part of the marketing for concerts, merch or whatever. Whether they make 10$ or 1,000,000 $ a year in ticket sales and royalties is a different matter (obviously, having been in the business for 50 or 60 years helps).
As for how “free” educational use should be, I’m not sure about that. A few decades ago there was no internet, no apps, no videos, only records, sheet music, tabs, songbooks and the company of other musicians (pros or amateurs). If someone wanted to learn a song, then they had to rely on those sources, and it still was not impossible. I don’t mean to come off as a modern day Luddite, but I think that “easy access” to these things, while a welcome change, should not be taken for granted.
You, and several others here, have had copyright claims on covers so gs.
No big issue, no action needed.
Justin had a copyright strike and a forced removal of a video that carries the threat of 2 more strikes in a 90 day period means the channel can be shut down.
Understood, Richard. I’m not fussed about this from a personal perspective of posting covers.
I was more interested in it from a general perspective, the details of blocking vs copyright strike.
Not fully understanding this. Does it mean that if I had three videos posted in a 90 day period with copyright strikes that my channel would be shutdown?
Hi, if you get a message that there are copy rights and that you can continue as long as you don’t make money with it, there is never a problem ( I have them too)… if you have to delete your video due to a copyright strike, it is ’ 3 strikes and you’re out… (I often read that )
Last year I posted a video clip I took at a Scotland v Ireland rugby match at Murrayfield in Edinburgh. It contained the crowd singing ‘Flower of Scotland’. I got a copyright claim for that.
Doesn’t really make sense.
Yeah, I remember that video you posted. Strange what happened. Especially with a national anthem! Who gets the royalties from that? If they go into the public coffers let’s start singing non-stop and hope they’d fund the nhs, schools, roads, bring the tax down…
It makes me think though…
What about all those musicians busking in the streets? Often they do covers and hopefully get a penny from a passer-by.
So if the same reasoning is applied, someone should give them a copyright strike and take the £2 the might have made?
That seems absurd to me.