Skip to main content

Add a Soundtrack to Your YouTube Clips for $1.99

Everyone knows YouTube is more music videos than home videos, but those that do upload their own creations often run into trouble when they want to use copyrighted music in their clips. If you use a song that you don't own as the soundtrack to your video (or even if it just happens to be playing in the background while you're filming), YouTube will cut the audio from your clip citing copyright infringement as the reason why.

It's frustrating for users but it's just part of the deal when media companies are coming down so hard on sites like YouTbe. One company trying to find a solution that everyone can live with is Rumblefish. According to the NYT, the music licensing company has collaborated with Google and will tomorrow announce a new service called Friendly Music which will allow users to buy a license to a copyrighted song for $1.99.

The idea behind Rumblefish is to give users access to songs for non-commercial purposes. Paying $1.99 will get you full access and permission to edit it, too.

"A lot of the users of YouTube are the everyday filmmakers, and they don’t have an outlet like this," said Paul Anthony, chief executive of Rumblefish. "We’re excited about this being a connection point, the first of many steps to make music really easy to use in video."

It sounds like a great service but, unfortunately, there is a catch, and this one is pretty big. Right now, Friendly Music offers access to about 35,000 songs but none of them are from the four major labels. That said, the company hopes to add more songs soon and Anthony told the NYT that the tracks available right now were hand-picked based on what they thought would work for film.

Would you pay $1.99 to add a soundtrack to your home movie? Let us know in the comments below!

  • blackbyron
    NOOO!!
    Reply
  • abswindows7
    Justin barber and lady homo will get richer dang it
    Reply
  • bildo123
    No, but I'm glad they're laying the crackdown on such things. For awhile there Youtube was (realistically still is) the new "Limewire" for people to pirate music.
    Reply
  • nforce4max
    Greed is the leading killer of man kind and we don't need any more of it. I am so sick of these under handed tactics that they use to make money.
    Reply
  • mikem_90
    This is something that the music industry should have jumped on long ago if they had an ounce of brain. I hope this service takes off and leaves the big four labels in the dust. No more money to the RIAA or MPAA.

    I applaud Youtube for being able to partner and offer the service.

    Now pricing might not be the best, but it would be nice to see move forward and evolve.
    Reply
  • Clintonio
    Very clever. It's like a cheap compromise. Works for everyone.
    Reply
  • Pyroflea
    I just stick to using music from producers that aren't greedy bastards. They do exist surprisingly.
    Reply
  • anamaniac
    Shouldn't partial revenue form Youtube ads go towards paying for the songs? Youtube is the one making a profit from them, so it only makes sense honestly.
    Reply
  • noodlegts
    Why is it that every artist/record company that demands compensation for their work/intellectual property is considered "greedy."

    That's how they make their money - how they make their living.

    I think it's everyone unwilling to pay for it who is cheap.

    Fast food chains charge royalties for people to open their stores, yet this is commonly accepted. Isn't paying for use of music exactly the same thing?
    Reply
  • henrystrawn
    I have a couple vids up on YT. I use "underscoring" that I have "ripped" to my HHD. youtube gives credit to the copyright holder on upload. If youtube wants to stripe the audio from my videos let them. I will just loop some myself. Underscoreing is just that. In short NO, I would not pay for underscore tracks when there is so many that are royalty free, or easy to create.

    Now the "Youtube Affiliates", that actually receive ad revenue, most of them use original loops or indie band material that they have permission to use. It's great advertising for the artists, and is becoming a viable marketing tool.
    Reply