Well, you just knew this deal would be resurrected…it was only a matter of time. We have commented in the past about this ’story’ with slight controversy too….

You see as music lovers in the social circle of many songwriters/performers, our view, that bands get more out of You Tube than many realise, let’s say - raised a few eyebrows.

The reach of You Tube batters certain radio stations (as one example) we could mention. Yeah we understand the royalty payment and fully endorse remuneration for art & craft but the simplistic view that You Tube should pay as much as radio stations which was voiced by some at the time never took into account the fact You Tube is a different and unique beast.

I’m sure we don’t need to spell out the characteristics to anybody on this planet so we won’t but how can the viral opportunity, interactivity and sheer scale of  You Tube not count for  anything?

In the grand scheme of popular music history (let’s say from some time in the 1950’s) You Tube is comparatively still embryonic. It’s what You Tube can become that musicians should focus on, it’s the availability to all musicians all over the world that’s exciting. If you could turn the clocks back and look at bands from the 1980’s offering them a global broadcast platform for free they would have snatched your hand off in return for that marketing opportunity.

You Tube provides a zero cost video platform and perhaps more importantly millions of users - now that bands/artists are getting something financially for their You Tube performance we think it’s time to focus on how You Tube traffic can be optimised for the artist to create more value for themselves - it can be done - particularly in conjunction with other web activity.

Although a compromise has been agreed, we’re guessing it leans in You Tube’s direction. It will be interesting to see if information about the ’solution’ leaks out soon!

Hey and at least we can all watch what we want when we want now.

GYEO