Reefa Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 Quote New data not only reveals that stream ripping remains the music industry's main piracy threat, but it's growing too. IFPI's latest music consumer insight report shows that more than a third of all Internet subscribers use stream rippers to access unlicensed music. Free music is easy to find nowadays. Just head over to YouTube and you can find millions of tracks including many of the most recent releases. While the music industry profits from the advertisements on many of these videos, it’s not happy with the current state of affairs. Record labels complain about a “value gap” and go as far as accusing the video streaming platform of operating a DMCA protection racket. YouTube doesn’t agree with this stance and points to the billions of dollars it pays copyright holders. Still, the music industry is far from impressed. Today, IFPI has released a new music consumer insight report that highlights this issue once again, while pointing out that YouTube accounts for more than half of all music video streaming.“User upload services, such as YouTube, are heavily used by music consumers and yet do not return fair value to those who are investing in and creating the music. The Value Gap remains the single biggest threat facing the music world today and we are campaigning for a legislative solution,” IFPI CEO Frances Moore writes. The report also zooms in on piracy and “stream ripping” in particular, which is another YouTube and Google related issue. While this phenomenon is over a decade old, it’s now the main source of music piracy, the report states. A survey conducted in the world’s leading music industry markets reveals that 35% of all Internet users are stream rippers, up from 30% last year. In total, 40% of all respondents admitted to obtaining unlicensed music. 35% stream ripping (source IFPI) This means that the vast majority of all music pirates use stream ripping tools. This practice is particularly popular among those in the youngest age group, where more than half of all Internet users admit to ripping music, and it goes down as age increases. Adding another stab at Google, the report further notes that more than half of all pirates use the popular search engine to find unlicensed music. Stream rippers are young (source IFPI) TorrentFreak spoke to former RIAA executive Neil Turkewitz, who has been very vocal about the stream ripping problem. He now heads his own consulting group that focuses on expanding economic cultural prosperity, particularly online. Stream ripping is a “double whammy,” Turkewitz says, as it’s undermining both streaming and distribution markets. This affects the bottom line of labels and artists, so YouTube should do more to block stream rippers and converters from exploiting the service. “YouTube and Alphabet talk of their commitment to expanding opportunities for creators. This is an opportunity to prove it,” Turkewitz informs TF. “Surely the company that, as Eric Schmidt likes to say, ‘knows what people want before they know it’ has the capacity to develop tools to address problems that inhibit the development of a robust online market that sustains creators.” While stream ripping remains rampant, there is a positive development the music industry can cling to. Two weeks ago the major record labels managed to take down YouTube-MP3, the largest ripping site of all. While this is a notable success, there are many sites and tools like it that continue business as usual. Torrentfreak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byntf Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 On 9/19/2017 at 7:04 PM, Reefa said: The report also zooms in on piracy and “stream ripping” in particular, which is another YouTube and Google related issue. While this phenomenon is over a decade old, it’s now the main source of music piracy, the report states. Who would do such a thing? I bet no-one ever, Ever actually thinks of ripping (IDM) music from youtube or veoh or archive.org or mp3free sites !!! And the check is in the mail... the dog ate my homework... OOoohh NOOoo, baby; I promise I won't cu/\/\ in your mouth! (Pay no attention to that 3GB's of stuff on one external drive or 4.5GB's on the other - that's all perfectly legal music content. I think I inherited it fro my Gram or sumthin) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kokain Posted September 30, 2017 Share Posted September 30, 2017 Agree, who the hell rips shitty 128kbps music from streams when you can have a FLAC or mp3 VBR version directly from the source. These damn punk kids. The worst is when they re-encode it to 320kbps to try and fool us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven36 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 10 hours ago, Kokain said: Agree, who the hell rips shitty 128kbps music from streams when you can have a FLAC or mp3 VBR version directly from the source. These damn punk kids. The worst is when they re-encode it to 320kbps to try and fool us Nothing has really changed much since back in the days of Napster pirates were the 1st ones too release DRM free mp3s on the internet they were all 128kbps music back then because Hard drives were too expensive too store big files and everyone was on dailup so it took forever too download things . YouTube cut the bitrates down low not long ago so people would stop ripping it they use too be Itunes quality . There are other video sites that don't belong too Google with better quality audio music still also there is lots of ways too get better quality music only way id use YouTube too store anything offline if it don't exist anywhere else and if I find better i replace it. Only as a last resort witch is hardily ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIKTOR PAVEL Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 12 hours ago, Kokain said: Agree, who the hell rips shitty 128kbps music from streams when you can have a FLAC or mp3 VBR version directly from the source. These damn punk kids. The worst is when they re-encode it to 320kbps to try and fool us if 128kbps it is average acceptable for low-end output you not notice difference in this systems coz source is low bitrate and output is not Hi-Fi you need above 128kbps or flac only for high-end output you notice difference coz source and output is high bitrate and high fidelity high bitrate files need high fidelity systems is like when use DTS or AC3 5.1 in low-end 2 speakers : you miss hole thing if you use good home theater system you get full experience!!! me think hundreds users only want listen music into their devices what ever bitrate is only collectors and high systems owners care about high bitrate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven36 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 3 hours ago, VIKTOR PAVEL said: if 128kbps it is average acceptable for low-end output you not notice difference in this systems coz source is low bitrate and output is not Hi-Fi you need above 128kbps or flac only for high-end output you notice difference coz source and output is high bitrate and high fidelity high bitrate files need high fidelity systems is like when use DTS or AC3 5.1 in low-end 2 speakers : you miss hole thing if you use good home theater system you get full experience!!! me think hundreds users only want listen music into their devices what ever bitrate is only collectors and high systems owners care about high bitrate See YouTube uses Opus codec if you chose that stream witch has better sound than AAC OR MP3 at low bitrates and AAC has better sound at lower bitrates than mp3 does if you chose that one the reason for upscaleing is not too improve the sound quality it's too maintain the original sound quality from converting . Some players will play Opus out the box i even have the Opus plugin for Winamp if anyone needs it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.