COMPETITION
Internet

 

 

The head of the EC’s digital single market, Andrus Ansip, has spoken out over what he perceives as unfair competition in music streaming. He said that YouTube’s comparatively small payments to artists gave it an unfair advantage over rivals such as Spotify, the Swedish streaming service.

 

Ansip said “this is not only about rights owners and creators and their remuneration — it is also about a level playing field between different service providers,” said the former prime minister of Estonia. “Platforms based on subscriptions are remunerating those authors; others service providers do not. How can they compete?” Record labels have long complained that YouTube — which has become the world’s most popular music service — pays too little to use their songs.

 

And Artistes have also been vocal in their complaints: “YouTube is paying out about a sixth of what Spotify and Apple pay artists,” said Nikki Sixx adding: “[YouTube is] hiding behind this safe-harbor loophole. That is allowing them the freedom to not take care of artists.” Metallica manager Peter Mensch said: “YouTube? They’re the devil. If someone doesn’t do something about YouTube, we’re screwed. It’s over. Turn off the lights.”
YouTube has publicly blamed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) it signs with major labels for its inability to tell artists exactly how much cash it’s passing their way. During the show, Robert Kyncl, Chief Business Officer at YouTube told BBC Radio 4: “It’s just really hard when there’s no transparency for the artist… I can say we’d be very happy to share that information… if we could.”

 

Ansip also called on search engines such as Google to be more transparent in the way that they provide search results. “People want to know where those platforms . . . are providing their own services, where they are providing paid-for results and where they can find the real market leaders,” he said. “Maybe it is not too much to ask for more transparency.”

 

However, Ansip had tweeted that he wanted to ‘keep the safe havens provisions intact’ and a leaked DSM Strategy paper won’t change the ISP liability regime as we know it. The draft Communication (Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market Opportunities and Challenges for Europe“. The draft version is dated 18 April) stresses that, whilst “designed at a time when online platforms did not have the scale they have today”, the existing if outdated E-Commerce Directive has done a good job in creating a regulatory environment “that has considerably facilitated their scaling-up”. Without the shield from liability for UGCs, a crucial element “for the further development of the digital economy in the EU and for the unlocking of investments in platform ecosystems” would be missing, to the detriment of the EU Information Society as a whole.

This is why “the public consultation showed strong support for the existing principles of the e-Commerce Directive”, and the EU Commission wishes to maintain it as it is — apparently without adding new kinds of ISP to the E-Commerce Directive fabulous three (i.e., mere conduit, caching, and hosting), differently from what the public consultation on the E-Commerce envisaged investigating the need to further legal regimes for linking and cloud service providers.

 

The draft also leads to the conclusion that any EU-wide notice-and-take-down procedure will be postponed. The public consultation on the E-Commerce Directive included a question on the opportunity to harmonise the notice-and-take-down procedure (NTD) EU-wide but the Commission does not intend to take any action saying  “before considering launching an initiative, the Commission will assess the impacts of on-going reforms such as the copyright review, the REFIT of the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive and important co-regulatory initiatives such as the EU Internet Forum … The Commission will continue to review the need for formal notice-and-action procedures during the second half of 2016, taking into account the effect of the updated audiovisual media and copyright frameworks on illegal content online”.

 

http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/youtube-gears-up-to-enter-battle-for-music-streaming-exclusives/

http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/breaking-dsm-communication-on-platforms.html

COMPETITION

Internet

EU digital chief takes aim at YouTube

 

The head of the EC’s digital single market, Andrus Ansip, has spoken out over what he perceives as unfair competition in music streaming. He said that YouTube’s comparatively small payments to artists gave it an unfair advantage over rivals such as Spotify, the Swedish streaming service.

 

Ansip said “this is not only about rights owners and creators and their remuneration — it is also about a level playing field between different service providers,” said the former prime minister of Estonia. “Platforms based on subscriptions are remunerating those authors; others service providers do not. How can they compete?” Record labels have long complained that YouTube — which has become the world’s most popular music service — pays too little to use their songs.

 

And Artistes have also been vocal in their complaints: “YouTube is paying out about a sixth of what Spotify and Apple pay artists,” said Nikki Sixx adding: “[YouTube is] hiding behind this safe-harbor loophole. That is allowing them the freedom to not take care of artists.” Metallica manager Peter Mensch said: “YouTube? They’re the devil. If someone doesn’t do something about YouTube, we’re screwed. It’s over. Turn off the lights.”
YouTube has publicly blamed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) it signs with major labels for its inability to tell artists exactly how much cash it’s passing their way. During the show, Robert Kyncl, Chief Business Officer at YouTube told BBC Radio 4: “It’s just really hard when there’s no transparency for the artist… I can say we’d be very happy to share that information… if we could.”

 

Ansip also called on search engines such as Google to be more transparent in the way that they provide search results. “People want to know where those platforms . . . are providing their own services, where they are providing paid-for results and where they can find the real market leaders,” he said. “Maybe it is not too much to ask for more transparency.”

 

However, Ansip had tweeted that he wanted to ‘keep the safe havens provisions intact’ and a leaked DSM Strategy paper won’t change the ISP liability regime as we know it. The draft Communication (Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market Opportunities and Challenges for Europe“. The draft version is dated 18 April) stresses that, whilst “designed at a time when online platforms did not have the scale they have today”, the existing if outdated E-Commerce Directive has done a good job in creating a regulatory environment “that has considerably facilitated their scaling-up”. Without the shield from liability for UGCs, a crucial element “for the further development of the digital economy in the EU and for the unlocking of investments in platform ecosystems” would be missing, to the detriment of the EU Information Society as a whole.

This is why “the public consultation showed strong support for the existing principles of the e-Commerce Directive”, and the EU Commission wishes to maintain it as it is — apparently without adding new kinds of ISP to the E-Commerce Directive fabulous three (i.e., mere conduit, caching, and hosting), differently from what the public consultation on the E-Commerce envisaged investigating the need to further legal regimes for linking and cloud service providers.

 

The draft also leads to the conclusion that any EU-wide notice-and-take-down procedure will be postponed. The public consultation on the E-Commerce Directive included a question on the opportunity to harmonise the notice-and-take-down procedure (NTD) EU-wide but the Commission does not intend to take any action saying  “before considering launching an initiative, the Commission will assess the impacts of on-going reforms such as the copyright review, the REFIT of the Audio-Visual Media Services Directive and important co-regulatory initiatives such as the EU Internet Forum … The Commission will continue to review the need for formal notice-and-action procedures during the second half of 2016, taking into account the effect of the updated audiovisual media and copyright frameworks on illegal content online”.

 

http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/youtube-gears-up-to-enter-battle-for-music-streaming-exclusives/

http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/breaking-dsm-communication-on-platforms.html