Article Voip Comparison GuideSaw Japan replacement from monety
It seems incredibly appropriate that I’m sitting here the day after many online organisations were ‘blacking out’ in protest at the SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), writing an article on how some of the organisations in support of this bill are showing over-zealous, knee-jerk reactions in protecting what they own and what they think they own.
YouTube, the world’s biggest video streaming website is a prime example of how to manage freedom of speech and expression, whilst protecting the original material that rights holders own. Here’s how…
YouTube has a content ID system that scans every video uploaded to see if copyrighted material has been used either partially or in it’s entirety. Rights holders can sign up to protect their original content and if a video is flagged up as containing content they own they have three options.
1) Block the video
2) Monetise (earn revenue through adverts and iTunes links)
3) Track viewing metrics (keep an eye on it)
The content ID system is enormously important in allowing record labels and artists to control how their music is used – and for smaller musicians and acts, the chance to boost their revenue is obviously of great benefit.
Let’s say for example some thug from the London riots last year uploaded a video of his mates setting fire to a car with a Lady Gaga track in the background. Presumably, Lady Gaga wouldn’t want her music associated with such an action, therefore her label has the opportunity to block the video.
Let’s now say that someone has uploaded a video of their dog on a skateboard and put an Avril Lavigne track with it. It’s a bit naughty to use music without permission, but the video is kind of cute, so her record label might not mind too much about it and will let the video stay, but with adverts displayed so revenue can be gained in return.
Common sense prevails! Hooray! Or does it?
Well as good as the content ID system is for musicians, it can make mistakes – it is technology after all. Google have a dispute system in place for videos that have been mis-identified which should resolve any potential issues…shouldn’t it?
Let me tell you a story about how a record label could possibly have taken advantage of the content ID system to make money out of an unsigned band.
That band, is my band. Le Monnier is a three-piece rock act that released an album in September and put their first music video on YouTube in October. Before I go any further let me say this: We wrote our own music, we recorded it ourselves and released it ourselves. There is no label involvement and we own the rights to our music completely.
So, in October we uploaded a video for a track called Con Amor Siempre. It gained a modest number of views and we were fairly happy, until one day we logged into our account and were told our video had been blocked in Germany because the video contained content owned by an entity called SME.
SME stands for Sony Music Entertainment and the content ID system had mistakenly identified our track as been owned or partially owned by them. Not only was the video blocked in Germany, but an advert had been displayed on our video’s YouTube page and an iTunes link below for an artist and track that had nothing to do with our music.
Now I should say at this point, it obviously isn’t Sony Music Entertainment’s fault. YouTube’s content ID system has clearly made a mistake and by submitting a dispute the whole matter should be cleared up. So we promptly disputed this and awaited the result. Our next visit to YouTube proved even more surprising:
Copyright Info: Le Monnier – Con Amor Siempre Music Video (HD)
These content owners have reviewed your video and confirmed their claims to some or all of its content: Entity: SME Content Type: Sound Recording
Say what? So by Sony Music Entertainment’s own admission, they have watched our music video and decided they own some or all of it. Um… no they don’t. We do. Entirely.
Now because we had already submitted our dispute to YouTube, the matter was finished in their eyes. The only way to resolve this issue now, was to contact Sony Music Entertainment directly. In the mean time, our video was still blocked in Germany and there were still adverts on the page with an incorrect iTunes link that presumably someone was earning money from.
So here is the long process we had to go through in order reclaim music that we’ve always owned the rights to. Firstly we had to send a tweet to @SonyMusicGlobal to obtain the right e-mail address. We then wrote to Sony Music asking them to remove their claim and here was the response: “This claim has been released. Thank you.”
We were relieved! We logged into our account to check everything was okay and guess what? Nothing had changed. The block was still in place, the adverts were still there. “Okay,” I thought. “It must take a couple of days to get fixed.”
Two weeks later and we still had this false claim of ownership hanging over us. We sent one last e-mail to Sony Music Entertainment…
Hello,
We recently contacted you about a false copyright claim made on one of our music videos. You replied to say this claim has been released, however this is not the case as restrictions on our video are still in place.
This is extremely damaging to our online presence, as our music video is blocked in Germany, cannot be viewed in user playlists, has adverts displaying on our video and an incorrect iTunes link. Does SME receive advertising revenue from the ads displayed on our video? Is the incorrect iTunes link for an SME signed artist? We wish to know whether Sony Music Entertainment has benefitted financially from our music which you have no rights over whatsoever.
We are writing to demand a written response to this complaint and action within 10 days of this e-mail being sent otherwise further action will be taken.
Kind Regards,
Matt Keil
On behalf of Le Monnier
We asked some pretty reasonable questions about whether or not SME were making money out of our music. They didn’t even bother with a response.
Last week, we only had one option left. We wrote a blog about our experience and took to Facebook and Twitter to tell our story.
Guess what? Within about 48 hours the ads and the country block had been removed. We had finally got what we wanted: to stop someone else wrongly claiming our music was theirs. The extent to which we had to go to, to argue that our music is ours was incredible.
If they did it to our band, how many other people are they doing it to? No apology or explanation was given and our important question remains unanswered. So let’s ask it once more:
Do record labels use YouTube’s content ID system to unfairly make money out of unsigned musicians?
Editor’s note: This guest post was written by Dave Chase, the CEO of Avado.com, a patient portal & relationship management company that was a TechCrunch Disrupt finalist. Previously he was a management consultant for Accenture’s healthcare practice and founder of Microsoft’s Health platform business. You can follow him on Twitter@chasedave.
Entrepreneurial epiphanies surface in random places. For Eric Page, it was watching Brad Pitt’s latest movie, Moneyball. The epiphany caused him to shift Amplify Health’s business model from a provider of technology to a heavy user of technology. While there is a wave of disruptive technology in healthtech, as interesting is the wave of disruptive innovation on the care delivery side of healthcare. These companies aren’t technology companies, however technology plays a pivotal role.
Previously, Page had been the Founder & President of REM Medical, a clinic for sufferers of sleep apnea. A key part of any sleep clinic’s service is prescribing CPAP machines. The problem is that the percentage of people who actually follow-through is quite low (40%) even though the results can dramatically improve one’s life. A series of behavioral insights, often applied through the use of technology allowed REM Medical to double the industry average adherence to 79%. As healthcare shifts from a “do more, bill more” model of reimbursement to a value and outcomes-based model, these kinds of results will separate the winners from the losers. Amplify Health’s original vision was to package the behavioral insights in software and sell them to providers.
With the success of his previous company, Page thought it would be easy to sell this vision to healthcare providers. Unfortunately, many healthcare providers are making the same mistakes that newspaper companies made in the late 90’s. That is, they aren’t moving as quickly as circumstances dictate. The problem is that urgency is sometimes only evident in hindsight. This is what led to the Moneyball epiphany.
For those who haven’t seen the movie or read the book, Moneyball tells the story of how Major League Baseball’s Oakland A’s Billy Beane (the team’s General Manager) was faced with a payroll that was one-third the size of their competition. Beane realized he needed to come up with a different way of picking players or he’d lose bidding wars against richer teams. For over 20 years, baseball statistician Bill James had proffered theories of baseball statistics that flew in the face of conventional wisdom on what statistics best represented a player’s value to a team. James was ignored until Billy Beane came along. He applied James’ theories with great success regularly fielding playoff teams that had one-third to one-half the payroll of the teams they competed against.
While watching Moneyball, Page had the realization that he had been acting like Bill James evangelizing his theories. Even with a successful track record, he wasn’t getting the traction he desired. Instead, he decided he should become Billy Beane and apply his knowledge to his own company. Rather than monetize via a software licensing model, Amplify Health will be in the onsite clinic segment delivering primary care and managing chronic conditions. [See DIY Health Reform: Employers Solving Healthcare Crisis One Onsite Clinic At A Time for more on onsite clinics.]
Amplify Health isn’t alone in this trend. Other examples include MedLion, One Medical Group, Qliance and White Glove Health [Disclosure: MedLion is a customer of Avado's]. These are healthcare providers who’ve applied technology to enhance their competitive advantage. Traditional healthcare providers should be on notice about these types of disruptive innovators. After all, in the late 90’s the newspaper companies were worried about other media competitors and big players such as Microsoft. What devastated their business models was an array of niche competitors who bit by bit hollowed out chunks of their business. Companies such as Monster.com, eBay, Cars.com, Zillow, Craigslist and many others. Like newspapers that were oligopolies or monopolies, many large health systems haven’t been faced with the level of competition that is emerging. As William Gibson has stated, “the future is here, it’s just unevenly distributed.”
By definition, the legacy HealthIT vendors have optimized their solutions around the legacy reimbursement and delivery models that have created the hyperinflation in healthcare crushing family, business and government budgets. The exciting aspect of this for the healthtech startup community is entire new categories of software are emerging to support disruptive innovation taking place on the care delivery side. Even more promising is that many providers, payers and pharmaceutical companies have set up innovation groups. I wrote about one earlier — Healthcare Field of Dreams In Idaho: Health System Opens Innovation Center. An array of new models are being tested at organizations such as Horizon Health Innovations, Catholic Health West, Trinity Health, Catholic Health Initiatives, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida, Catholic Health Partners, Blue Shield of California and many others.
Often what has passed for innovation in healthcare is a clever way to maximize the latest reimbursement code or government incentive. For example, a large swath of providers are chasing after Meaningful Use incentives. Meanwhile, there are others building a sustainable competitive advantage in rethinking delivery models from the ground up. Not long ago, CareMore was acquired for $800 Million by WellPoint because they’d developed a creative new delivery model. VCs are taking notice. For example, Dirk Lammerts, MD is a VC with the Burrill Venture Capital Group who has stated he will avoid investing in businesses dependent on Medicare reimbursement. Rather, he wants true disruptive innovation.
Taking place this week is the Health Innovation Summit being put on by RockHealth. I’m moderating a panel on business models for health-related startups – panel members include Linda Avey, Ron Gutman and Jennifer Wong. I will speak to some of the aforementioned business models and the accompanying business models for companies that support those entities. Collectively, we’ll discuss models ranging from monetizing mobile apps to how value can be derived as a byproduct of customer use (e.g., PracticeFusion) to media models and more. What creative business models in healthcare should we be aware of? Please add your comments below.
This period also axiom Japan replacement from being a feudal bund to having a retail numizmatyka Kraków control and sinistral the Japanese with a lingering Western influence.