State Champ Radio youtube
Page: 11
TikTok COO V. Pappas is stepping down to “move on and refocus on my entrepreneurial passions,” they announced on Thursday (June 22nd) in an email to the company they subsequently shared on Twitter.
“To our amazing community of creators, employees, and people who have made TikTok ‘the last sunny spot on the internet,’ it has been an absolute privilege to serve you all and to be a part of this once in a lifetime journey,” they tweeted.
TikTok’s chief of staff, Adam Presser, will take over operations, according to a staff email from CEO Shou Chew. “He will seek to further develop the voices of TikTok’s vibrant and diverse ecosystem and drive closer cross-divisional strategic planning and collaboration, in an effort to bring to life our mission of inspiring creativity and bringing joy to people by nurturing and supporting creators, users, and partners worldwide,” Chew wrote.
In addition, Zenia Mucha will join the company as chief brand and communications officer. Mucha previously served for two decades at Disney before departing the company in 2021. She “will focus on advancing the strategic vision of our brand and advising key businesses,” Chew explained. “It is essential that we widen the aperture of our marketing and communications functions to further fortify TikTok as a beloved brand and one of the most trusted entertainment platforms in the world,” he added. “With Zenia’s vast expertise and deep experience, we are well positioned to do so effectively.”
Pappas, a former YouTube executive — the company’s first audience development lead, the author of The YouTube Creator Playbook, and the developer of YouTube’s Creator Academy and channel certification program — initially joined TikTok in 2018.
“Five years ago when I was first approached by TikTok, I was incredibly inspired by the product vision to be a new mobile-first video experience that serves as a canvas, bridge and window for everyone,” they wrote in their goodbye letter. “The pitch was to take on a role to transform and grow the product and broaden its appeal through developing diverse communities and content… I took a gamble on what was then a completely unknown company and product.”
Pappas then stepped into the interim global CEO role after Kevin Mayer departed suddenly in 2020.
The days of TikTok being “unknown” are of course long gone; much of the music industry now focuses on the platform to market artists and find new ones to sign.
“Five years later, we have grown to a global team of thousands of people and I believe we have achieved our goal to innovate and define an entirely new experience for people to share, create, and be entertained,” Pappas noted. “Today I stand proud that we deliver a product that resonates with over 1 billion people around the world. TikTok is now a household name.”
According to Pappas’ letter, they will be “taking on an advisory role” during the transition period.
A Grammy Award-winning composer has dropped her closely-watched lawsuit against YouTube over access to its anti-piracy tools like Content ID, just a day before it had been set to go to trial — and weeks after a federal judge gutted the case by refusing to let it move forward as a class action.
Maria Schneider spent years litigating her lawsuit, which claimed that YouTube had become a “hotbed of piracy” because it provided effective content tools only to “powerful copyright owners” like record labels and not to “ordinary owners” like artists and songwriters.
But on Sunday (June 11), with a jury trial scheduled to kick off on Monday morning), lawyers for both sides told a federal judge that they had agreed to end the case without a decision: “In light of the stipulation of dismissal of all claims with prejudice, the jury trial set for June 12, 2023, is vacated,” Judge James Donato wrote. “The case is closed.”
The sudden end to the case came just weeks after Judge Donato issued a crucial ruling that dramatically reduced the scope of the lawsuit: That Schneider could not team up with tens of thousands of other rightsholders who she claims suffered similar harm from YouTube’s policies.
Schneider quickly moved to appeal that ruling and postpone the trial, arguing that it would “gravely undermine” the goals of her lawsuit. But a federal appeals court denied that motion on Friday.
Faced with a jury trial they had warned would be “enormously wasteful,” Schneider’s lawyers dropped their case. Neither side immediately returned requests for more information about how the resolution of the litigation was reached, including specific details about any kind of settlement agreement.
Filed in 2020, Schneider’s lawsuit claims that YouTube (owned by Google parent Alphabet) forces songwriters and other smaller rights holders to use “vastly inferior and time-consuming manual means” of policing infringement, allowing piracy of their material to flourish on the platform.
For its part, YouTube says it’s done nothing wrong. In court documents, the company has argued that it’s spent “spent over $100 million developing industry-leading tools” to prevent piracy, but that it limits access because “in the hands of the wrong party, these tools can cause serious harm.”
The case was filed as a class action, aiming to let potentially tens of thousands of aggrieved copyright owners team up to fight what Schneider’s lawsuit called “institutionalized misbehavior.” An expert retained by her legal team said the class could include between 10,000 and 20,000 rights holders.
But in a May 22 ruling, Judge Donato refused to “certify” the case as a class action. Under federal law, class-action accusers must share very similar legal concerns — and the judge said Schneider’s fellow rights holders would have widely different cases against YouTube.
Following that ruling, Schneider quickly moved to postpone the trial. But at a hearing days after the decision, Donato said he would stick to the schedule: “I’m not going to do that. You got a trial set on June 12th. This is a 2020 case; OK. It’s showtime.”
In a June 5 emergency petition to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Schneider’s lawyers demanded the appeals court put the case on ice while she filed an appeal on the class certification issue. They argued that a “brief” pause would prevent the judge’s “last-minute, haphazard and erroneous” ruling from derailing a case with important implications.
“The named plaintiffs here joined the case to litigate class claims, and to vindicate their view that YouTube tramples on the rights of independent artists and smaller copyright holders overall, not just those of the individual plaintiffs,” her lawyers told the appeals court.
But in a ruling published on Friday evening, the Ninth Circuit rejected those arguments: “The court, in its discretion, denies the petition for permission to appeal,” the court wrote. “Petitioners’ emergency motion for a stay is denied as moot.”
Schneider and her lawyers still could have proceeded to trial against YouTube, litigating the case simply on behalf of her and another plaintiff. But they had strongly indicated in court filings that they did not want to proceed to the trial without class-action status.
A Grammy Award-winning composer who is suing YouTube over access to its anti-piracy tools is now asking a federal appeals court to postpone her looming trial, filing an emergency motion that says the upcoming proceedings will be “enormously wasteful.”
With a trial set to kick off next week, Maria Schneider asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Monday to “stay” the proceedings, arguing she needs time to litigate her appeal that seeks to overturn a ruling last month that refused to let the case proceed as a class action.
Schneider says that decision, which means the case will not include tens of thousands of other copyright owners, was not only “manifestly erroneous” but also came “only three weeks before trial” – a sudden change that “gravely undermines” the goals of her case.
“The named plaintiffs here joined the case to litigate class claims, and to vindicate their view that YouTube tramples on the rights of independent artists and smaller copyright holders overall, not just those of the individual plaintiffs,” her lawyers told the appeals court.
“A brief stay here to allow this court to … ensure that the district court’s last-minute, haphazard, and erroneous conclusion that this case cannot be tried on a classwide basis does not endanger the progress of this litigation,” Schneider’s attorneys wrote.
Schneider’s lawsuit claims that YouTube has become a “hotbed of piracy” because the platform provides “powerful copyright owners” like record labels with tools including Content ID to block and monetize unauthorized uses of their content, but fails to do the same for “ordinary owners.” She says songwriters and other smaller rights holders are forced instead to use “vastly inferior and time-consuming manual means” of policing infringement, allowing piracy of their material to flourish.
For its part, YouTube says it has done nothing wrong. In court documents, the company has argued that it’s spent “spent over $100 million developing industry-leading tools” to prevent piracy, but that it limits access because “in the hands of the wrong party, these tools can cause serious harm.”
The case was filed as a class action, aiming to let potentially tens of thousands of aggrieved copyright owners team up to fight what Schneider’s lawsuit called “institutionalized misbehavior.” An expert retained by her legal team said the class could include between 10,000 and 20,000 rightsholders.
But in a May 22 ruling, Judge James Donato refused to “certify” the case as a class action, dramatically reducing the scope of the lawsuit. Under federal law, class-action accusers must share very similar legal concerns – and the judge said Schneider’s fellow rightsholders would have widely different cases against YouTube.
“It has been said that copyright claims are poor candidates for class-action treatment, and for good reason,” the judge wrote at the time. “Every copyright claim turns upon facts which are particular to that single claim of infringement [and] every copyright claim is also subject to defenses that require their own individualized inquiries.”
Following that ruling Schneider quickly moved to postpone the trial, which is set to kick off on June 12, while she launched an appeal. But at a hearing days after the ruling, Judge Donato said he would stick to the schedule: “I’m not going to do that. You got a trial set on June 12th. This is a 2020 case; okay. It’s showtime.”
In Monday’s emergency petition to the appeals court, Schneider’s lawyers argued that such a decision was unfair, forcing them to proceed to an expensive trial when the ruling on class certification might later be overturned on appeal.
“The class should not be forced into a situation where an appellate victory would be illusory, placing them back at square one, and the fruits of three years of hard-fought litigation evaporate even when the district court’s failure to certify a class has been confirmed as erroneous,” her lawyers wrote.
A response to the emergency motion from Google is due by the end of Wednesday.
Read the entire petition here:
It’s been 20 years since Linkin Park rocked the music world with their 2003 hit “Numb,” and this week, the emotionally charged music video hit 2 billion views on YouTube. It’s the band’s first clip to achieve the impressive milestone. Explore Explore See latest videos, charts and news See latest videos, charts and news The […]
Nearly 30 years after its release, the music video for No Doubt‘s signature 1995 hit, “Don’t Speak,” has reached one billion views on YouTube. The recent milestone marks the band’s first video — and one of less than 20 released in the 1990s — to enter the Billion Views Club, according to a press release […]
A federal judge on Monday (May 22) dealt a major blow to a lawsuit that claims YouTube enables piracy by restricting access to copyright tools like Content ID, refusing to allow the case to proceed as a class action that could have included tens of thousands of rightsholders.
The lawsuit, filed by a composer named Maria Schneider, claims that YouTube has become a “hotbed of piracy” because the platform provides “powerful copyright owners” like record labels with Content ID to block and monetize unauthorized uses of their content, but fails to do the same for “ordinary owners.”
But in his ruling on Monday, Judge James Donato said that Schneider could not team up with tens of thousands of other rightsholders who she claims suffered similar harm from YouTube’s policies, dramatically reducing the scope of the lawsuit.
Cases can only be “certified” as class actions if the various accusers share similar complaints against the defendant. And in Schneider’s case, Judge Donato said different rightsholders would have very different cases against YouTube.
“It has been said that copyright claims are poor candidates for class-action treatment, and for good reason,” the judge wrote. “Every copyright claim turns upon facts which are particular to that single claim of infringement [and] every copyright claim is also subject to defenses that require their own individualized inquiries.”
Filed in 2020, Schneider’s lawsuit claims that YouTube (owned by Google parent Alphabet) forces songwriters and other smaller rights holders to use “vastly inferior and time-consuming manual means” of policing infringement, allowing piracy of their material to flourish on the platform.
For its part, YouTube says it’s done nothing wrong. In court documents, the company has argued that it’s spent “spent over $100 million developing industry-leading tools” to prevent piracy, but that it limits access because “in the hands of the wrong party, these tools can cause serious harm.”
With a trial date looming next month, attorneys for Schneider had urged Judge Donato to let the case move forward as a class action. An expert retained by her legal team suggested that the class “at a minimum” would include between 10,000 and 20,000 aggrieved copyright owners.
“The Copyright Act does not countenance such blatant disregard of individual artists’ intellectual property rights,” her attorneys wrote. “Class actions were created for this institutionalized misbehavior that relies upon the disincentives and lack of resources for a lawsuit absent collective action. A class action is the superior method through which YouTube’s participation in and facilitation of copyright infringement can be held to account.”
But in Monday’s ruling, Judge Donato strongly disagreed. He said the many individual claims against YouTube would require “highly individualized inquiries into the merits,” including a case-by-case assessment of whether YouTube possibly had a valid license to those particular songs.
“Whether YouTube has a license for a particular work will be a matter of intense inquiry at trial,” the judge wrote. “The answer to this inquiry will depend upon facts and circumstances unique to each work and copyright claimant.”
Monday’s order won’t end the case, but it will now proceed to trial based only on copyrights owned by Schneider and two other plaintiffs (Uniglobe Entertainment and AST Publishing). The lawsuit is scheduled for a June 12 trial, though it’s unclear if that date will be changed in the wake of Monday’s decision.
An attorney for Schneider and a representative for YouTube did not immediately return requests for comment on Monday’s order.
YouTube brought in $6.69 billion in advertising revenue to start the year, continuing a downward trend for the video giant after past quarters of explosive growth during the earlier years of the pandemic.
The first-quarter revenue figure, reported as part of parent company Alphabet‘s quarterly earnings on Tuesday, is roughly a 2.6 percent decline compared to the $6.87 billion in revenue reported during the first quarter of 2022. The video platform previously reported $7.96 billion in ad revenue during the holiday season, falling short of Wall Street expectations and representing an 8 percent year-over-year decline.
In a call with investors, Alphabet CFO Ruth Porat said the company was “encouraged by progress” in monetization for YouTube Shorts, which rolled out its revenue-sharing program with creators in February. The executive also said there was “significant ongoing subscriber growth” in YouTube Music Premium and YouTube TV, though the company has not disclosed subscriber numbers.
YouTube is now led by Neal Mohan, the former chief product officer who assumed the CEO role in February after longtime executive Susan Wojcicki said she was stepping down to focus on her family and “personal projects.”
In his first public message released on March 1, Mohan said his top priorities included supporting YouTube’s creators by improving monetization tools, increasing accessibility on the platform and focusing on growth in areas like gaming and podcasting. Included in those areas were YouTube’s short-form offering, Shorts, and its streaming products like YouTube TV and Primetime Channels.
The executive also noted YouTube will continue to contend with an advertising downturn that notably impacted the company’s revenue growth last year. “This is a pivotal moment for our industry. We face challenging economic headwinds and uncertain geopolitical conditions. AI presents incredible creative opportunities, but must be balanced by responsible stewardship. Creators, viewers, and advertisers have more choices about where to spend their time than ever before and platforms like YouTube need to deliver across a range of formats while investing in the policies that protect platforms from real-world harm,” Mohan said in his letter at the time. “As I look ahead to what’s next for YouTube, I’m confident we’ll put our full energy into what matters most for creators and viewers.”
Parent company Alphabet saw modest growth during the first quarter, with total revenue increasing 3 percent year over year to hit $69.79 billion. The company said it took $2.6 billion in charges related to the January layoffs that resulted in 12,000 employees — or around 6 percent of Alphabet’s workforce — losing their jobs.
This article was originally published by The Hollywood Reporter.
Hailey Bieber is heading from the bathroom to the kitchen. Following the success of her YouTube interview series Who’s In My Bathroom?, the Rhode founder launched on Wednesday (April 12) the first season of What’s In My Kitchen?
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
The six-episode installment features the model sharing recipes for her favorite dishes, including chicken wings and an at-home version of her popular Erewhon Skin Smoothie. “What’s In My Kitchen? was a natural spinoff to Who’s In My Bathroom? because our audience was ready for us to stop eating in the bathroom!” Bieber said in a press statement, per The Hollywood Reporter. “I’ve loved cooking and sharing meals with friends on my social channels for years, and I can’t wait to bring this experience to the fans of our network with OBB and HexClad. Creating new formats and IP for my channel has been really empowering, as my team and I get to truly create everything from concept to screen, and I can’t wait for everybody to see what’s next.”
The show will also give back, as Bieber will source her cooking ingredients from Village Market Place from Community Services Unlimited, which works to “address the inequalities and systemic barriers that make sustainable communities and self-reliant life-styles unattainable,” according to their website. Hexclad will also make a donation to the Accion Opportunity Fund, which allows female-owned and POC-owned small businesses in the food industry to leverage $100,000 in microloans.
Watch the first episode of What’s In My Kitchen? below.
As the music industry becomes increasingly conscious of — and vocal about — the challenges of the streaming model, fraudulent streams have become a source of growing frustration. “Every penny that goes to a fraudulent stream is a penny that doesn’t go to a legitimate stream,” says Richard Burgess, president and CEO of the American Association of Independent Music. “Fraudulently increased stream counts can affect recording budgets, licensing deals, catalog valuations and can result in the misallocation of marketing budgets.”
The French government, which recently published the results of a months-long, country-wide investigation into streaming fraud, portrayed understanding the impacts of this activity as an imperative. “The stakes are high in our country as well as in the rest of the world: the development of music services, which can be free and financed by advertising, or paid through subscriptions, as individual or family plans, constitutes a tremendous opportunity for the music sector, after years of a long crisis,” the report asserted. “…Such growth whets the appetites and stimulates the creativity of those who seek to abuse the system.”
“The multiplication of fake streams, that is to say the processes allowing [bad actors] to artificially boost play counts or views to generate an income, is nothing short of theft,” the report continued.
The French study, conducted without data from YouTube, Apple Music, or Amazon Music, found that 1% to 3% of plays were fraudulent, while also noting somberly that “the reality of fake streams goes beyond what is detected.” BeatDapp, a Vancouver-based company that creates fraud detection software for labels, publishers, distributors and streaming services, believes the global level of fraud is higher. “In 2020, estimates were 3 to 10% of all streaming activity was fraud,” the company wrote in 2022. “Today, we confidently say it’s at least 10%, and more in some regions. That equals ~$2B in potentially misallocated streaming revenues this year, and will be ~$7.5B by 2030 if left unchecked.”
So what forms does streaming fraud take? According to Burgess, the practice “covers a multitude of techniques used to increase stream counts or impressions by other than legitimate means.”
Here are three of the most common:
Bots
Discussion of streaming fraud often turns quickly to bots, which Burgess defines as “automated software that can be used to generate views, streams or interactions.” To detect bot activity and prevent it from affecting royalty payouts, companies build models that trawl streaming data and look for listening patterns that appear anomalous: BeatDapp likes to discuss an example of finding tens of thousands of accounts all streaming the same 63 songs.
“If I’m trying to push numbers up, I’m going to do it across streaming services in a subtle fashion this way,” BeatDapp co-CEO Andrew Batey says. “Spread it across a lot of accounts and multiple platforms, and you can drive a significant number of plays with no one looking.”
Click Farms
Streaming services are looking for suspicious play patterns that don’t reflect human behavior. Fraudsters are aware of this, so they try to camouflage their activity in ways that appear human. One method is to get actual humans to press Play through what are known as “click farms.”
Eric Drott, a professor at the University of Texas in Austin who has written about streaming fraud, describes these as “enterprises concentrating low-paid, precarious workers who are engaged to perform the sort of rote, repetitive tasks that keep the flows of digital capitalism moving: creating social media accounts, moderating content for platforms, clicking online ads, liking or rating items and, of course, generating plays on streaming services.” Accounts that stream music 24 hours a day or stem from a smartphone that never moves or dips below 100% power could be evidence of click-farm activity.
Imposters
A third prominent form of fraud identified by Burgess involves impersonating creators by uploading a version of their song to streaming services and illegally collecting creators’ legitimate royalties. This is a common problem faced by artists who are having a moment on TikTok, for example: Imposters post a version of the TikTok hit on streaming services under a slightly different name, aiming to divert some streams (and hopefully royalties) their way.
“It happens to every single viral artist,” says one manager who shepherded a viral act to a major-label deal last year. There are many distribution companies out there, and managers say that some of them have lax oversight of what’s being uploaded to the DSPs through their platforms. This means artists and their teams have to keep close watch on streaming platforms and issue takedowns when they find imposter versions.
Post Malone and Swae Lee‘s “Sunflower” music video officially surpassed 2 billion views on YouTube on Thursday (March 9).
Originally released in the fall of 2018, the song was part of the soundtrack for the animated Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse and also ultimately made the tracklist for Malone’s 2019 studio album Hollywood’s Bleeding.
The music video borrows a multitude of scenes from the family-friendly movie to spell out the origin story of a young Miles Morales even as the rappers take turns crooning, “Callin’ it quits now, baby, I’m a wreck/ Crash at my place, baby, you’re a wreck/ Thinkin’ in a bad way, losin’ your grip/ Screamin’ at my face, baby, don’t trip.”
“Sunflower” became Malone’s third career No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 — after the 21 Savage-assisted “Rockstar” and “Psycho” featuring Ty Dolla $ign — when it reached the summit of the chart for a single week at the start of 2019. Meanwhile, it was Lee’s very first chart-topper and also scored nominations for record of the year and best pop duo/group performance at the 2020 Grammy Awards.
In November, the two rappers had another reason to celebrate their massive song after it achieved the record as the highest-certified single in the history of the Recording Industry Association of America at 17x Platinum.
Just a few weeks ago, the video for Posty’s 2015 breakout track “White Iverson” joined the Billion Views Club on YouTube, becoming the rapper’s fourth video to do so after “Sunflower,” “Rockstar” and “Congratulations” featuring Quavo — the latter of which is inching closer every day to the 1.5 billion mark.
Revisit the “Sunflower” music video below.
