Rick Beato is not happy

ferrinbonn

Member
Messages
1,569
Fixed it for you
I mean, so what? Yes, people on YouTube are trying to make money. I have no problem with that.

Leaving Beato out of it personally, I don't see how anybody can believe that the way copyright claims work on YT isn't massively broken if they understand how it actually works. Entities like record labels can slap a copyright claim on any video they want and then the default result is that 100% of the profits for that particular video go to the party that put the copyright claim, regardless of whether you can claim fair use, or if the offending part of the video was 10 seconds long, or anything else. They don't have to prove anything up front to do that. Don't like it? Yes, you can appeal. And the appeal goes to the party that put the copyright claim. They can just reject your appeal.

There are a few steps beyond that, but the risk of contesting things for a YouTuber is very dangerous. If you keep contesting and you lose your channel gets a copyright strike. 3 strikes and your channel is deleted. Needless to say, if you've spent years building up a subscriber base and making content, this is terrifying. So people get bullied into just sucking it up and dealing with it unless they're huge like Beato and have the ability to speak up and actually get noticed.

For those who seem ok with this system, how would you feel if a similar thing were implemented in live situations? Like say your band played a set at a bar and, heaven forbid, played one cover song. What if the record label for that song could step in and claim all of the money your band was going to get paid for that gig? How would you feel about that? Because that's effectively how the YT system works now.

And yes, I realize that venues pay ASCAP license fees, but there are certainly still tons of people who make a lot of money, or even their whole living, off of playing covers. Record labels don't have the right to step in and claim every cent associated with the performance, but that's exactly how it works on YT.
 
Messages
609
Irrespective of his personality and whether you like his videos...

The statement youtube's copyright system completely ignores fair use because it is built on top of an awful industry written law that places undue burdens on individuals is probably pretty reasonable.

Youtube demonetizes people playing covers as being IP violations. Clearly, that shouldn't be the case; the IP owner should just get the cover song rate. Furthermore, the system is set up so that you get strikes, which are a big deal if youtube is your primary source of income, and frequently the "rights holders" aren't actually the rights holder of that thing but because the system is heavily automated and has to break towards the right owner in such a ridiculous way, the video maker takes the hit.

Even if you dislike Beato if someone is fighting to bring IP laws back towards sanity (ie use as individuals) we should be happy about that as musicians.
 

BlueWolf

Mutations Expert
Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
1,686
I really don‘t get all the ire directed toward Rick Beato.

First of all, there’s no “rip off” value inherent to his videos. I mean, it’s not like he’s playing whole songs. In most of them, he plays about a ten second sample of each song. Are you telling me that the artists are losing business because Rick Beato is playing 10 second samples of their songs? Does anybody really think that people are watching Rick Beato videos to avoid having to pay for songs?

Second, I don‘t understand the argument that he is profiting off the work of artists without compensation. I can only go by my own behavior, but I have a hard time believing there aren’t many more viewers of his channel that feel the same way as I do. Often when he mentions a song I haven’t heard before, I’ll stream it (on a pay service) or buy it to give the full song a listen. There’s no question that he is promoting and generating business for the artists he covers. In fact, a lot of artists agree with this and gladly come on his channel for interviews. Obviously not all artists and content creators agree with this ”profiting off my work” argument. Steve Lukather, for example, also thinks the demonetization attacks on Beato are ridiculous and is a big supporter of his channel.

I just don‘t get the strident censorship policies of some of the artists and labels, and the open hostility so many people show towards him. I can‘t understand why they can’t see the great value Beato adds to the music industry, both as an educator and a promoter.
 
Last edited:

Shiny_Beast

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
11,428
I had watched the video in question and then saw the gripe video, no surprise there, what did he expect? I can't bring myself to care. Sure if a panel of judges deliberated for a couple hours they might decide his video should get a pass, but I bet that's not how it works.

He seems intent on pushing the grey area. If he really wants to make those videos put them out as non monetized loss leaders, or whatever that's called. It still does all the "good" for music and would still bring attention to his channel paying dividends in the long run. I guess then he wouldn't get all the revenue from his bitch and moan videos though.
 

PhxdB

Member
Messages
363
After reading this thread I am genuinely surprised that there is so much hate for Beato.

His knowledge, expertise, analysis, and ability to communicate in layman's terms to the ordinary person is un-paralleled.

Who else does that on youtube? No one.

The information and knowledge he gives comes from genuine experience and expertise. There's a lot of people in life who put on an act. Beato ain't one of them.

He knows his ****. Period.

Yeah, he's a youtuber and he's gotta play the monetization game. I don't watch any of the click bait stuff but no one else is putting out analysis videos on his level.

Sometimes in life you should simply shut up and listen to the experts. Beato is one of those experts.
 

Miroslav L

Member
Messages
2,742
It's hilarious that 90% of the comments on TGP about Rick's video are negative attacks, and under the video on YouTube, 90% of the comments are positive and supportive of Rick.

TGP'ers are a tough audience to satisfy...their standards are much higher than the typical YouTuber! :D
 

Cruciform

Member
Messages
258
TGP Age Range.jpg
 

Deuterium

Member
Messages
1,488
How dare they? He was only trying to expand these bands' listenership!

I appreciate Beato’s vids on theory, as well as analysis of music/songs.

However, he doesn’t have a leg to stand on in this particular matter. I am of the opinion that he MAY BE a bit disingenuous about “spreading the word” and “expanding these bands’ listenership”. As other people have already pointed out, he is getting clicks and trying to benefit from the monetization of the videos in question.

I don’t know the answer to this question, so I will ask the following question to those who are more familiar with his YouTube content:
Has Beato ever declared that he would waive the monetization of any of his YouTube content in which he uses the IP of other artists? There must be a setting on YouTube Content Creator in which you can personally disable any credit and monetization that normally would be conferred, on a particular Upload content, no?

I am NOT necessarily saying this would cause the IP property holders to say “okay”…but, at the very my least, that would make his argument more convincing.
 
Messages
609
I appreciate Beato’s vids on theory, as well as analysis of music/songs.

However, he doesn’t have a leg to stand on in this particular matter. I am of the opinion that he MAY BE a bit disingenuous about “spreading the word” and “expanding these bands’ listenership”. As other people have already pointed out, he is getting clicks and trying to benefit from the monetization of the videos in question.

I don’t know the answer to this question, so I will ask the following question to those who are more familiar with his YouTube content:
Has Beato ever declared that he would waive the monetization of any of his YouTube content in which he uses the IP of other artists? There must be a setting on YouTube Content Creator in which you can personally disable any credit and monetization that normally would be conferred, on a particular Upload content, no?

I am NOT necessarily saying this would cause the IP property holders to say “okay”…but, at the very my least, that would make his argument more convincing.

Uh I dunno but I'd be surprised.

If you are a small channel you don't have the option to turn monetization off, but instead of you getting the ad revenue youtube gets it instead :(
 

John Hurtt

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
19,864
Can we be done with this? Every few months Beato puts up a rant video...some posters bag on him, some support him....and his viewership increases each time.

Is it even slightly entertaining or educational at this point?
 

Guitarworks

Member
Messages
12,198
If featuring famous hit songs is going to make money for Beato in the way of clicks on his videos, then the songwriter, song owner or recording artist is going to say:

"This guy Beato is making money off my song. He may be promoting awareness of my song, which I have no problem with. But he's not allowed to make money off my song unless I give him written permission to make money off my song. So he can either stop using my song, or he can use my song and give me all the money he makes in clicks for that video, or he can sign a contract with me indicating how big or small of a cut of the money generated by the clicks I agree to let him keep."

Beato is saying: "I'm giving this artist's song free promotion. That's worth as much as, if not more than, the money I generate in clicks. So the artist should shut up, leave me alone, and let me use their song."

Well, the fatal flaw in Beato's argument is: There is no way to quantify how much money Beato's "promotion" is generating for the artist. And Beato is not in a position to decide or dictate what has value and how much value it has. The songwriter, song owner, or recording artist and their representatives are the ones who get to decide and dictate that.

So this really amounts to nothing more than b*tchy, pouty, sour grapes on the part of Beato.
 

Bruins1

Member
Messages
21
I haven’t checked his view numbers, but maybe he makes more money on these ‘rant’ videos than the ones that get demonetized (had they not gotten demonetized)? That seems like a pretty good business model if that’s the case.
 
Messages
609
If featuring famous hit songs is going to make money for Beato in the way of clicks on his videos, then the songwriter and/or recording artist is going to say:

"This guy Beato is making money off my song. He may be promoting awareness of my song, which I have no problem with. But he's not allowed to make money off my song unless I give him written permission to make money off my song. So he can either stop using my song, or he can use my song and give me all the money he makes in clicks for that video, or he can sign a contract with me indicating how big or small of a cut of the money generated by the clicks I agree to let him keep."

Beato is saying: "I'm giving this artist's song free promotion. That's worth as much as, if not more than, the money I generate in clicks. So the artist should shut up, leave me alone, and let me use their song."

Well, the fatal flaw in Beato's argument is: There is no way to quantify how much money Beato's "promotion" is generating for the artist. And Beato is not in a position to decide or dictate what has value and how much value it has. The songwriter, song owner, or recording artist and their representatives are the ones who get to decide and dictate that.

So this really amounts to nothing more than b*tchy, pouty, sour grapes on the part of Beato.

Is Beato's argument that he should get to use it for free because he is promoting it?

I feel like instead it's "this is protected by fair use. Also, these studios are missing the forest for the trees because these videos raise awareness of their artists."

The vast majority of claims are by studios, btw, not artists.

Now I'm willing to debate the second one unless someone can convince me my interpretation of what his argument is is incorrect.
 

pete692

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
6,283
Lol. Fanboys gotta fanboy, such is the way it’s always been. I will never get adult males dying on hills explaining why Mr. X or Mr. Z is just so put upon. This guy should start a religion, he’d be good at it - lots of followers that apparently didn’t know nuthin’ bout music until the Messiah brought them an interview from the guy who engineered “such and such”. What’s really hilarious is these guys are laughing all the way to the bank until there is the slightest bit of resistance from the rights holders or the platform algorithm that might cost them a few bucks. That’s when the pillow biting begins.

What a Martyr
 

TheSchwartz

Member
Messages
798
I think Beato would be better off making “in the style of” instructional videos that demonstrate how different artists construct and engineer their music, as opposed to dissecting individual songs. He might not get as many clicks, but he’d avoid copyright issues, and he could easily use these kinds of instructional videos to advertise additional material for purchase.

Given his musical knowledge, I’d imagine it wouldn’t be too difficult for him to write, say, a knockoff Led Zeppelin or Pat Metheny tune. This is something I have to do pretty much daily for my client’s commercials. Just last week I had to write what a client described as, “‘Eye of the Tiger,’ but like, NOT ‘Eye of the Tiger.’” Did I hate every second of it? Absolutely. Did I get paid well for it? No.

But the point is that I could make an instructional video using my lame “Eye of the Tiger” knockoff to explain the songwriting and recording techniques used to make the real version without infringing on any copyrights.
 
Messages
609
Ugh I'm making it seem like I'm on Team Rick Beato or something when I'm really not.

I just think youtube's copyright system sucks and the thing that makes them has to do that sucks and my god can we please just have an intellectual property system that actually benefits the original artists and not the youtube grifters or the studio grifters or google's stockholders pleaseeeeeeeee
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom