Rick Beato is not happy

Jim Soloway

Member
Messages
15,065
This sounds an awful lot like "however much fits with the point I'm trying to make".

Your own analogy was photocopying a whole book.

Anyway that's the end of the rope I'm willing to give you to show a degree of seriousness about this. It's not that hard to tell when someone's just making trouble. You seem to want significantly weakened fair use rules and are willing to distort to argue for it and that's cool you do you, and I'm gonna do me.
I'm sorry but you have completely mischaracterized what I'm saying. I have never once in this thread said anything about what I want. I have not advocated for weakening the rules and I most certainly am not "making trouble". What I have talked about is the rules AS THEY ARE. I don't set the rules and neither do you so what we want is not really relevant. That's why I have posted the actual rules from the courts, the clearance agency and Google. Those rules represent the standards as they are actually applied both by the courts and by Google (which owns YouTube).
 

A-Bone

Montonero, MOY, Multitudes
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
108,503
Ok I should have said "most likely" of the 4 to qualify given the use of only short excerpts.. But waht can I say you are correct could be argued to the most important excerpt So OK then .....None of of 4

That's why I brought this up. I'm not arguing one way or the other. I'm just much less confident it's easy for us to look at this case and say it's most likely fair use or it isn't. "Fair use tends to generate a fact-intensive, contested analysis when it's argued.
 
Messages
7,769
It's about whether what he's doing is right. And whether it's legal.
In our society, those are sometimes two separate issues.

Personally I've found his analyses interesting and his interviews thought-provoking.
But if he's becoming a millionaire without paying any royalties to the artists, IMO that's wrong.

To claim that there's promotional value to anyone but himself is ludicrous. Fair use seems like a far more reasonable avenue for him to argue, when selected sections for analysis are all he plays.

But I feel if he'd had the decency - or simply the foresight - to license the material that's bringing in so much money for him, the problem would never have arisen. It probably would've cost him a mere pittance, if he'd arranged it in advance.
 

Jim Soloway

Member
Messages
15,065
That I'm not so sure is the case. I tend to think it would more pronouncedly constrain what he could and could not use in his analyses.
Remember that what we're talking about is the use of the commercial recordings, not the use of the music/song. He said himself in the video that he played two of them on his acoustic guitar because he knew that use of the recording would be challenged. The video he referenced was not an analysis of recordings but rather a demonstration of unusual time signatures in popular songs. He could have banged out all of his examples on his guitar, done his time signature lesson and probably have had no claims at all.
 

A-Bone

Montonero, MOY, Multitudes
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
108,503
Remember that what we're talking about is the use of the commercial recordings, not the use of the music/song. He said himself in the video that he played two of them on his acoustic guitar because he knew that use of the recording would be challenged. The video he referenced was not an analysis of recordings but rather a demonstration of unusual time signature in commercial music. He could have banged out all of his examples on his guitar, done his time signature lesson and probably have had no claims at all.

Indeed. Copyright law treats musical composition and sound recording copyrights distinctly (including in suspect, even absurd ways).
 

KevWind

Member
Messages
759
Ymmv, but everything "discussed" was exhausted by the first few pages. I guess this is what the youtube drama gossipers strive for though.
Ha true, it's all about the number of views . or should I say posts
Personally I don't like or dislike Beato, But find his ongoing bitching videos tedious, and in this specific case, I think he is just plain wrong.
 

splatt

david torn / splattercell
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
27,740
I have significant sympathy for the original creators in that they are not often the rights holders. Especially because often the deal they got is pretty raw when you look at how much money they generate versus how much they end up getting.
interesting perspective; not sure that view is very complete, though.

because.....
whatever rights the original owners of the complete materials (ie, the artists) once held, and whichever of those rights are now controlled by Big Business (or whatevs), i would presume that the original owners had been compensated for their ceding of rights, in advance.
right?
i mean: would you make a deal, wherein you got nothing in return for your full rights?
nope, you would not.

as well: unless the artists' rights were sold COMPLETELY --- which means including those of AUTHORSHIP, which remains uncommon (if becoming increasingly common of the .1% of musical artists who sell their stuff lock, stock & barrel, these days.

for those artists who maintain only their AUTHORSHIP rights, on paper they, too, are being protected by the "rules" that serve the Big Businesses.
eh?
to boot, some artists might still have some control (and financial reward) for both Publishing and Sync rights; as with every business transaction regarding Copyright, agreements tend to go down on a usually individual, case-by-case basis.
 

IIIBOOMERIII

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,734
Not being able to learn music by listening to examples is like trying to learn to paint without being able to look at other paintings. I get ownership of the music but not being able to use 20 seconds to use as a teaching tool to learn music is ridiculous. That being said, I was amazed at how Rick got me to watch an infomercial for Ernie Ball strings when he compared string gauges. I felt so used when it was over. However, kudos for being smart about marketing.
 
Messages
214
What I find ironic is that when Rick sends out one of his inevitable regularly scheduled "I'm mad because I've been de-monitized again" videos, he makes a goodly sum of money on THOSE videos where he whines about it because it seems to always stir up his 3M subscribers again with thousands of more views. haha, he can't lose for winning!
 
Last edited:

CFB85

Member
Messages
127
32 pages of quasi legal argument. Dancing on the head of a pin. Good lord. If the Rickster feels so outraged take it to court big man. That's all there is to it. Settle the point. End of. He's smarter than that though. Clearly, we are more gullible. If Rick wants to utilise music to illustrate (& monetize) theoretical concepts - nothing stopping him using that riveting back catalogue of his own to run the latest exciting analysis of, 'What makes this song good?'

0297912C-0AA4-4F07-BF90-94DC48B0C81C.gif
 
Last edited:
Messages
584
interesting perspective; not sure that view is very complete, though.

because.....
whatever rights the original owners of the complete materials (ie, the artists) once held, and whichever of those rights are now controlled by Big Business (or whatevs), i would presume that the original owners had been compensated for their ceding of rights, in advance.
right?
i mean: would you make a deal, wherein you got nothing in return for your full rights?
nope, you would not.

as well: unless the artists' rights were sold COMPLETELY --- which means including those of AUTHORSHIP, which remains uncommon (if becoming increasingly common of the .1% of musical artists who sell their stuff lock, stock & barrel, these days.

for those artists who maintain only their AUTHORSHIP rights, on paper they, too, are being protected by the "rules" that serve the Big Businesses.
eh?
to boot, some artists might still have some control (and financial reward) for both Publishing and Sync rights; as with every business transaction regarding Copyright, agreements tend to go down on a usually individual, case-by-case basis.

This relies on artists and the rights holders having a symmetric relationship, certain degrees of rationality, etc.

I think you can disagree with me on that front without suggesting my view is incomplete, when actually what I'm saying flows very logically from my premise that rights holders have the majority of the power in this relationship.

Your argument is also complete. It relies on an assumption I don't agree with.

Honest question, did you consider whether or not what I was saying would make sense under the rather reasonable premise that rights holders might have a long history of exploiting and taking advantage of their talent?
 

splatt

david torn / splattercell
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
27,740
This relies on artists and the rights holders having a symmetric relationship, certain degrees of rationality, etc.

I think you can disagree with me on that front without suggesting my view is incomplete, when actually what I'm saying flows very logically from my premise that rights holders have the majority of the power in this relationship.

Your argument is also complete. It relies on an assumption I don't agree with.

Honest question, did you consider whether or not what I was saying would make sense under the rather reasonable premise that rights holders might have a long history of exploiting and taking advantage of their talent?

yes.
i meant no insult to you; i’m sorry if it seemed otherwise!

i thought i was clearly pointing to the divisibility of rights, and to the raw fact that many artists do, in fact, maintain 100% of their creative copyright, and some others do hang onto at least portions of their Publishing, Sync (and in some fewer cases, Master).
today’s actually professional recording musicians tend generally to be better versed in “ownership” & “rights” than in the past.
because we learn.
 

binge

Member
Messages
1,692
First time Beato popped up in my feed was searching for Pat Metheny and finding his interview. It was the BEST interview I've ever seen with a musician. Through that, I found interviews with Di Meola and Via. Again fantastic interviews, because Beato is SO excited about what these guys do, but can totally talk shop with them. I would LOVE to see him interview Jeff Beck.

I can't really do the song dissection stuff or the lessons, but the guy can conduct an interview.

Exactly what I like about him too - his interviews. He should focus on interviews with famous players, because it seems he has great contacts in the industry.
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom