Fair Play for Creators

Google wouldn't have any traffic if it wasn't for creative content. They need to realise this, or they are going to lose out to somebody who does

I Pledge my support for the Fair Play for Creators campaign

It is hard enough for songwriters to earn their keep, the help of the PRS for Music makes this at least viable but we must ensure that decisions taken now at the cusp of what will be the future are right and for that reason take a stand.

Thats Great News, About Time!

I pledge my support for the Fair Play for Creators campaign...

Absolutely. Support you 100%.

These artists have worked hard to create what we enjoy. They deserve to have their work protected and be fairly treated and paid.

It's essential that PRS For Music keeps up the battle for all its members' rights in every medium. Keep up the good work!

I believe that creativity is important for the world and since we only get paid for the things we get published, it is vital for us to be paid when someone likes what we do - or else we die.

YouTube's entire model is based on other people's creativity. I think it's fair that this creativity is rewarded.

Absolutely, with you 100%

This is a sad and provocative action by Google. In recent years the writers creators performers and owners of music have lost huge sums of money as the infant internet taught itself to walk. In this process online users became used to getting music free. The current Youtube situation gives us an opportunity to make clear that music has a value and so do the creators of it. Why should Google make us pay for a business that they bought and say they cannot afford? It maybe that Google have made a mistake with YouTube but that is not our fault. I know what our local plumber would say if I suggested not paying him!

Despite all the excitement and gold-rush hysteria inspired by the Internet over recent years, there is still almost no money in it at all for creators of music.
Internet Piracy is bad enough, but when even legitimate websites like YouTube, claim that the only way they can make their business model work is for composers and songwriters to accept tiny micropayments for the use of their music, something weird is going on.

The precipitous action taken by YouTube in the middle of negotiations with PRS For Music could only be for dramatic effect and is a disservice to their own subscribers.
Do they really think it's fair that several million hits will earn a songwriter barely enough to finance a visit to Starbuck's? Is that the real difference between legal and illegal online music?

It is important for the future of music, and for future generations of music creators, that they can rely on earning an income from their songwriting. You wouldn't expect to go and see a play or a film for free - why should music online be viewed any differently? Songwriters put serious hours into their craft and deserve some compensation from the likes of Google and other online businesses, who are earning some pretty considerable profits on the back of the creative community. The power of music should not be undervalued in such a way.

I think the Internet is only going to get bigger so it’s only fair that the artist/songwriter get rewarded for the viewing on the Internet just like a radio play or a TV placement.

YouTube is not alone in the online hall of shame where the worthy notion of greater consumer choice is used as a cloak to disguise the fact that copyright infringement happens on a grand scale.

I co-wrote 'Never Gonna Give You Up', which Rick Astley performed in the eighties, and which must have been played more than 100 million times on YouTube - owner Google. My PRS for Music income in the year ended September 2008 was £11.

Music videos and music generally is at the very heart of User Generated Content sites. It is the hard work and creative endeavour of songwriters and musicians everywhere that has been the bedrock upon which many of these websites have been built, creating along the way huge value for their owners. As well as arguing with them over royalty rates, we should be fighting them to get proper recognition for the part we've played in building their businesses.

Google/YouTube are in effect asking songwriters to give away their songs for nothing. The longer music is available for nothing or next to nothing online, the quicker the demise of the recording industry.

Google is manipulating the PRS for Music dispute in a deeply cynical way; to confuse the public into believing that the industry is outdated and behaving in a protectionist manner. Nothing further could be from the truth.

Just remove advertising from the 'offending' pages. These pages would earn no money...Google ARE becoming evil.

I have been a Writer and Publisher Member for 20+ years and I appreciate and support you 100%, how dare they adopt this tactic.

PRS for Music exists to ensure songwriters and composers are paid their rightful reward for the music they create. It is not a commercial organisation, but a not-for-profit collective of songwriters, composers and publishers. Google is a big commercial entity which must properly pay the very people who make the YouTube service a success.

I get cross when internet companies paint the picture of a faceless and immensely powerful 'intellectual property industry' as their main enemy just because it suits them. Those under attack are people of flesh and blood, who are passionate about their profession. When I speak with younger colleagues about their current situation I feel a strong sense of compassion for them and I understand their anxiety about the future. Some of them feel that their work is being degraded. There are those crusaders for the right to share files who say: 'Why don't they go on tour and sing for their supper'. This argument shows a staggering ignorance of the fact that so many of the people who write the songs have more often than not never been in contact with artist life. They are producers and songwriters, full stop.

PRS for Music should be proud of taking a strong stance in the music industry and standing for principle. It's Google and YouTube at fault here. Well done PRS for Music.

I deserve to be paid fairly for my work and I am certainly not overpaid - especially these days. I want music lovers to enjoy music but my music will not pass into the public domain until long after my death. Up until that point, I am legally and morally entitled to get paid.

If we allow non-music corporate giants like Google to get away without paying for music, then a day may come when songwriters can no longer earn a living. I would urge songwriters to join PRS for Music to guarantee earnings.

Royalties from the use of commercial music on the Internet are a lifeline to current and future writers of music. It is a great shame that Google seems to be unnecessarily blocking what could be a beneficial deal for all parties - fans, creators and online services alike.

There is a huge growth in online music use, which is not only extremely healthy, but also extremely dangerous for music creators. Today, more people enjoy more music and more established and new talent is given a platform to the public through such online businesses as Google / YouTube. However, like any other profession or form of employment, songwriters and composers have a basic right to earn from their work.

All I ask as a songwriting member of PRS For Music, and that which the Society works diligently to ensure, is to be paid a fair amount for music creators and to allow the public to enjoy the results of those efforts.

It should be noted that Google, which bought YouTube, reported revenue of US$ 5.54 billion in the quarter ended September 30th, 2008 (reference: CNN.com). According to 'The Herald Tribune', the Internet search giant said that its net income was US$1.31 billion.

In my opinion, the facts speak for themselves.

Songwriting royalties have been hugely important to me over the past 30 years. I could never have survived as a recording artist purely on the income paid to me by record companies. From my first record in 1975 through to the present day, PRS for Music has collected and sent performance royalties I didn't even know I was owed - year in year out without fail. Honest and transparent, in the shark infested waters of the music industry, PRS for Music has been the one reliable lifeline on which struggling composers & writers can depend. Today that industry is in crisis, with the price of music recordings being forced inexorably downwards. Which is why preserving the value of musical compositions matters more than ever - to safeguard the livelihood of songwriters and composers in future generations.

There's probably an image of songwriters being rich and glamorous people living lavish lifestyles. The reality is that most of us, around 90% of PRS for Music's membership, earn less than £5000 a year from royalties. PRS for Music is a not for profit organization that is literally a life saver for me and many songwriters I know. They shouldn't be made to look like the bad guys. In an age where more and more people download music for free, music creators and writers are becoming an endangered species. We don't get much from the online world as it is. This move by Google could well be the nail in the coffin for many of us.

PRS for Music s a not-profit organisation representing creators of music. They are only asking of Google what they would ask of any other company wishing to use music content. It's really simple. Musical content helps Google to make huge profits from adverts on their site. Why do they think they shouldn't pay a fair price for content that enables them to get rich?

Live Music has suffered badly in recent years with the introduction of the smoking ban and the burdensome Licensing Act. The small people, the local talented musicians still have to survive from music if they to be able to devote sufficient time to reaching their full potential.

It would have been nice to think that a big company like Google would have supported distributing in favour of the creators of their 'Free' content. Maybe working with PRS for Music to provide accurate information so that more creators of content can be distributed to.

We want to say a few things about people watching videos on YouTube and basically how things should work out better for bands. We're a small band trying to push our band forward and we appreciate getting exposure from websites like YouTube but there needs to be a fairer way for the payment system to work. We love doing the music but we can't keep doing it for nothing. We need financial support. No band exists without money.

Try telling the supermarket that all food is free, or go to the garage and top up with the peoples right to free diesel.

Google/YouTube is just full of copyrighted material that is not monetised, and it is popular with consumers for that very reason. If you want to hear a song or catch a music video, however rare, it'll be there.

PRS for Music is quite rightly finding a way to ensure music creators get what's due to them with respect to the ever-changing way media is being consumed.

There has to be a way forward - an online business model that not only satisfies the consumer but provides a revenue stream that gives the music industry a future.

The most worrying aspect of this dispute is their withholding of data. I think that YouTube has quietly become one of the major portals for many people to hear music and it surprises me not a bit that they are underpaying PRS for Music.

Every time I play a song on the radio the songwriter gets a fair fee. The same should be true of Internet transmissions.

I think royalties are really important. I'm an independent artist and I self-release so all the royalties come back to me. They make such a difference. It's important that people can keep check of that and it all gets back to the artist because you work really hard and struggle an awful lot.

We have our own label and we've released two singles in 2008. For us it's really important that those four times a year when the sweet cheque drops through our virtual inbox because royalty collection is central to being able to continue doing what we do. We're tremendous fans of PRS for Music - long may you reign.

Google and YouTube pretend they are providing a public service. They are not, they are huge money making machines who make incredible fortunes for their owners at the expense of songwriters who get paid no royalty. The vast majority of PRS fro Music members earn less than a few thousand pounds a year . It is a totally unfair situation.

PRS for Music royalties make up a significant part of a songwriter's income. More than 90% of PRS for Music members earn less than £5,000 per year from royalties. We need to be paid when people listen to and download our music. It's our job and we have bills to pay like everyone else. Google made a £3bn profit last year so the current situation doesn't seem very fair.

Good luck with it - I am sure all PRS for Music members and much of the public are behind you.