Warner Music and MTV in licensing 'stalemate'
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Mar 3rd 2009 at 2:32PM }
It's not exactly clear where Activision Blizzard, publishers of the Guitar Hero franchise, stand in this battle royal(ties). Actilizzard CEO Bobby Kotick was very vocal late last year when Bronfman started whining about licensing fees, going so far as to say that perhaps music companies should pay game publishers to feature their tracks in games.
[Via The Cut Scene]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
tcc3 @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:46PM
That explains no Green Day. How did they manage ACDC and Alanis Morisette for RB?
Tiptup300 @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:49PM
I wish one of the big news sites would make a list of the top artists who are owned by which studios and which studios MTV/activision have delt with in the past. *hint hint* joystiq. *nudge nudge*
tcc3 @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:55PM
Not quite what you wanted but I did get a list of artists per label from Wikipedia to confirm my comment above.
DCBlack @ Mar 3rd 2009 8:08PM
They got those on because the agreement ends this summer, if I'm reading the article right. That means artists like AC/DC came out for RB when the agreement was (and still is at the moment) valid. Time for HMX to get to work pumping out all the WMG tracks they can before the agreement expires.
Eric @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:49PM
This is dumb on WMG part I know they feel like they want more money. But let's face it Rock Band is a new form of revenue for them. and the music industry as a business is dying.(Thank God, most of the stuff that comes out of those places is souless commercial crap anyway) why not just get what you can get. With the Internet and new forms of distribution most artist don't even need to be on a huge label to get there music out there anymore.
BxGT @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:51PM
What the fuck is wrong with these greedy assholes, first they take down all videos on youtube with their music even tho no one was making a profit and now they want more money?
The Baron @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:26PM
The death throes of a dying industry.
capt_carl @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:52PM
Let's not forget what WMG did to Youtube recently...
Leobebes (BDF: Braid Defence Force) @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:54PM
This is yet another example of these stupid music studios not going along with the technological advancements of digital distribution. They are dinosaurs and they will rot away, unfortunately they will take some their artists with them.
Face it they want to get a bigger piece of the pie not because it benefits the artists but it benefits all the suits bloated salaries, their weekly vacations that includes their coke and hooker tab.
Greedy, incompetent, talentless, impotent hacks at the top of every major corporation bringing down the consumer and their product. Sad reality we all live in.
Tiptup300 @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:01PM
Their loss, I wouldn't give them a cent unless it's through rock band.
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:56PM
still mad at dude from ActiBlizzards comment. thats like saying the Radio companies should be paid to play music as well. even tho often times that does happen with upcoming artists
samfish (is ready for MadWorld!) @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:59PM
If that does happen, it's blatantly illegal.
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:09PM
is it illegal??? I mean I know that it often happens under the table with certain DJ's but I didnt know it was illegal
samfish (is ready for MadWorld!) @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:16PM
Yup. It's called Payola. You aren't allowed to broadcast on TV or radio anything if you've been paid to do so, unless you run a disclaimer saying you've been paid to do so.
Similarly, Plugola is when you or the station broadcasts something that is of a personal financial interest, but fail to disclose that over the air.
I'm sure it happens here and there, but for the most part, the big music labels don't do it, since they can get HUGE fines leveled against them for doing so.
Storm @ Mar 4th 2009 6:30AM
Actually both MTV and Actiblizzard could make a pretty good stand for charging for the music to be included in their games, seeing as the content needs to be modified to be useful. You can't just create an mp3 of the song and play it on Rockband/GH, you need the developers to add the notes. And yes, while I'm sure that DLC creation is probably just one giant macro by now, it's still an extra effort. Thing is, I'm sure that both Microsoft and Sony get a cut of the sale proceeds as well as for just hosting the data on their servers.
If Warner Bros. executives got their heads out of their you know whats, what they should do is hand these songs over to both companies with money to cover the development process, and put it up on both networks as "non-profit" (enough to cover the fees, but no profit to the companies). Warner Brothers artists get more exposure which may lead to fans actually buying the songs on MP3 or CD. Rockband/GH gets great exposure because their song catalogs are huge. Win/Win.
Reboot @ Mar 4th 2009 10:09AM
@Storm -- I'm already proof that your idea works. I've bought several songs off of iTunes solely because I liked playing them in Rock Band, several songs I'd never heard before Rock Band. You'd think the executives would be able to make the correlation.
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Mar 4th 2009 10:34AM
I think it works more the other way around. I mean they MADE an Areosmith game BECAUSE people requested it. so why SHOULDNT the artist get paid for it??
lpmeteora325 @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:57PM
great....my hope for my Linkin Park down the drain.....
MowDownJoe @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:04PM
I would cheer for that, but I've already made myself look like an asshole once this week.
samfish (is ready for MadWorld!) @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:17PM
Don't be a pussy about it! It's only Tuesday! You should make it a goal to be an asshole every day this week!
Leobebes (BDF: Braid Defence Force) @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:07PM
Ha ha you like nu-metal with a sprinkle of suburbanized, privileged rap!
DCBlack @ Mar 3rd 2009 8:12PM
Some good LP in there already, at least.
samfish (is ready for MadWorld!) @ Mar 3rd 2009 2:57PM
I'm always amazed when I find myself rooting for Mtv/Viacom, but Warner Music Group really are a bunch of rotten bastards.
...that goes for all music publishing companies, though. I'm so happy that companies like Apple are raping them thanks to their refusal to change from their archaic polices.
nehal @ Mar 4th 2009 5:57PM
How could you root for Viacom??? I am sorry but Viacom did still sue youtube/google and like took all of their music off the site. So at this point i hate all record companies.
meist3r @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:16PM
And again: Captain Copyright and License Lad to the rescue ...
baconaholic @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:25PM
The consumer always loses.
Mimglow @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:34PM
Since it's a mutually beneficial relationship, why wouldn't they enter into agreements to share profits from DLC? Your song gets downloaded 50,000 times? MTV gets a certain percentage, and the record company a smaller percentage. Simple.
Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Record Company Executives. Not necessarily in that order.
T @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:50PM
Okay, I'm not a fan of this as much as the next guy...but that whole reducto ad nazium is a bit excessive.
Mimglow @ Mar 3rd 2009 3:52PM
It was tongue in cheek :)
Tiptup300 @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:02PM
They do get a small percent, they want a bigger percent.
Mimglow @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:04PM
Yeah, but they need the other revenue streams that are revitalized by having a song in the game. Studies show that purchases of said song go through the roof as soon as it ends up in a rhythm game.
Kyle @ Mar 3rd 2009 5:04PM
And with the music industry in the state that it's in you'd think that would be enough incentive for a record company; revenue from the DLC (however small a percentage they may think it is) coupled with the increased sales from the song(s) in the DLC through iTunes et al.
Oh well...
John Perkins @ Mar 3rd 2009 4:02PM
I'd love to see MTV and it's affiliates refuse to play WMG artists on their television stations. See how long WMG is willing to hold out then. MTV may not be the big player it once was in terms of music recognition, but I'd be very surprised if a move like this didn't immediately impact the sales of WMG artists.
Young_Nastyman @ Mar 3rd 2009 5:23PM
I hope HMX made a bunch of deals with some more of my fav bands from WMG
MrSpaceCowboy @ Mar 3rd 2009 8:09PM
Hopefully they can get this sorted out sooner rather than later. There are a lot of acts in WMG's stable that I'd like to see in the game or would like to see more from.
GIMME HUEY LEWIS AND THE NEWS!
I'd prefer to not start downloading content for GH:WT. (Or begin playing it for that matter.)
Robert Maynard @ Mar 3rd 2009 8:27PM
I wish I could say "who gives a shit about these fatcats" but all of the publishers are so big that there's always SOMEONE on there that you'd miss. :|
WMG owns Roadrunner Records, for example = Opeth, Porcupine Tree, Dream Theater and Megadeth, among some other pretty key metal bands. The latter two have already featured, but I'd really love to see some Opeth or Porcupine Tree on Rock Band. And that's just one subsidiary. :(
Take a gander at all of them together:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Music_Group_artists
ridv34 @ Mar 3rd 2009 10:05PM
How exactly was no one making a profit while youtube got more visitors and therefore earned more ad money?
nehal @ Mar 4th 2009 6:01PM
Dammit muse is with WMG. This is not even fair.