Warner Music, YouTube

Warner Music Group ordered YouTube on Saturday to remove all music videos by its artists from the popular online video-sharing site after contract negotiations broke down.

The order could affect hundreds of thousands of videos clips, as it covers Warner Music's recorded artists as well as the rights for songs published by its Warner/Chappell unit, which includes many artists not signed to Warner Music record labels.

The talks fell apart early on Saturday because Warner wants a bigger share of the huge revenue potential of YouTube's massive visitor traffic. There were no reports on what Warner was seeking.

"We simply cannot accept terms that fail to appropriately and fairly compensate recording artists, songwriters, labels and publishers for the value they provide," Warner said in a statement.

YouTube is hugely popular, with more than 100 million viewers in the United States alone in October, according to comScore, a Web audience measurement firm.

Warner Music, home to artists including Red Hot Chili Peppers and rapper T.I., was the first major media company to negotiate a deal with YouTube in 2006. Its executives believe that deal gave the site legitimacy in the eyes of search giant Google Inc (GOOG.O) which bought it soon after for $1.65 billion.

As part of the original 2006 negotiation, Warner, Universal Music and Sony Music all took small stakes in YouTube pre-acquisition and profited when the Google acquisition closed.

The music companies typically get paid a share of any advertising revenue associated with the video and a per-play payment for every video viewed. The per-play fee is usually a fraction of a penny and with millions visiting YouTube everyday it was all expected to add up to a substantial amount.

But a source familiar with Warner Music's talks said the amounts it has been receiving from YouTube were "staggeringly low".

YouTube representatives did not immediately return calls for comment.

YouTube executives have spent most of 2008 stepping up efforts to develop revenue streams on the site partly in a bid to keep content partners happy. It has been in long negotiations with Warner on how best to split revenues until things came to a head in talks on Friday.

"Despite our constant efforts, it isn't always possible to maintain their innovative agreements," YouTube said in a statement on its blog about difficulties of music licensing. "Sometimes, if we can't reach acceptable business terms, we must part ways with successful partners."

YouTube also has agreements with Vivendi's (VIV.PA) Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and EMI Music. Warner's move could see them also making tough demands for higher fees.

The demands could leave YouTube in a difficult position as it tries to balance the need to pay a reasonable fee to content partners, including TV and movie companies, and also generate enough return on the substantial investment needed to keep streaming millions of videos around the world.

more....

Recording labels and websites in a music video tussle
Universal Music Group
Urban artist Akon, left, during the making of the "I'm So Paid" music video. Paid product placement underwrote the Universal Motown video's entire $1-million production cost.
The removal of Warner Music Group's videos from YouTube over the weekend highlights the growing tension between music labels and websites over what is becoming an important source of revenue for the beleaguered recorded-music industry: advertising and licensing fees from music videos, the foundation that built MTV but which has now largely migrated to the Internet.

The impasse comes at a time when all four major labels -- Warner, Universal Music Group, Sony BMG Music Entertainment and EMI Music -- are renegotiating their licensing deals with YouTube, the largest video site.

Technorati : Entertainment, Sony BMG Music, Urban artist Akon, YouTube, music industry, online, online music, tech, video tussle

Researchers have discovered our experience of pain depends on whether we think someone caused the pain intentionally.

In the study, participants who believed they were getting an electrical shock from another person on purpose, rather than accidentally, rated the very same shock as more painful. Participants seemed to get used to shocks that were delivered unintentionally, but those given on purpose had a fresh sting every time.

Pain Hurts More If Person Hurting You Means It

Researchers at Harvard University have discovered that our experience of pain depends on whether we think someone caused the pain intentionally. In their study, participants who believed they were getting an electrical shock from another person on purpose, rather than accidentally, rated the very same shock as more painful. Participants seemed to get used to shocks that were delivered unintentionally, but those given on purpose had a fresh sting every time.

The research, published in the current issue of Psychological Science, was led by Kurt Gray, a graduate student in psychology, along with Daniel Wegner, professor of psychology.

It has long been known that our own mental states can alter the experience of pain, but these findings suggest that our perceptions of the mental states of others can also influence how we feel pain.

"This study shows that even if two harmful events are physically identical, the one delivered with the intention to hurt actually hurts more," says Gray. "Compare a slap from a friend as she tries to save us from a mosquito versus the same slap from a jilted lover. The first we shrug off instantly, while the second stings our cheek for the rest of the night."

The study's authors suggest that intended and unintended harm cause different amounts of pain because they differ in meaning.

"From decoding language to understanding gestures, the mind distills meaning from our social environment," says Gray. "An intended harm has a very different meaning than an accidental harm."

The study included 48 participants who were paired up with a partner who could administer to them either an audible tone or an electric shock. In the intentional condition, participants were shocked when their partner chose the shock option. In the unintentional condition, participants were shocked when their partner chose the tone option. Thus, in this condition, they only received a shock when their partner did not intend them to receive one. The computer display ensured that participants both knew their partner's choice and that a shock would be coming, to ensure the shock was not more surprising in the unintentional condition.

Despite identical shock voltage between conditions, those in the intentional condition rated the shocks as significantly more painful. Furthermore, those in the unintentional condition habituated to the pain, rating them as decreasingly painful, while those in the intentional condition continued to feel the full sting of pain.

Gray suggests that it may be evolutionarily adaptive for this difference in meaning to be represented as different amounts of pain.

"The more something hurts, the more likely we are to take notice and stop whatever is hurting us," he says. "If it's an accidental harm, chances are it's a one-time thing, and there's no need to do anything about it. If it's an intentional harm, however, it may be the first of many, so it's good to take notice and do something about it. It makes sense that our bodies and brains might amplify our experience of pain when we know that the pain could signal threats to our survival."

These findings speak to how people experience pain and negative life events. If negative events are seen as intended, they may hurt more. This helps to explain why torture is so excruciating - not only are torture techniques themselves exceptionally painful, but it's the thought that counts-and makes torture hurt more than mere pain.

On the other hand, if negative events are seen as unintended, they may hurt less. This may explain, in part, why people in abusive relationships sometimes continue to stay in them. By rationalizing that an abusive partner did not intend harm, some victims may reduce their experience of pain, which could make them less likely to leave the relationship and escape the abuse.

The research was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health, the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Institute for Humane Studies.

Technorati : Researchers, discovered, health, human mind, mind, news, science
Del.icio.us : ered, health, human mind, mind, news, science
Flickr : ered, health, human mind, mind, news, science