Our own Josh Wolford reported about the video:

The RIAA and MPAA, in their push to rid the internet of what they dub rampant piracy, have set internet storage locker sites like MegaUpload firmly in their crosshairs as well. While saying that a site like MegaUpload is illegal would likely spawn quite a bit of debate, copyright holders obviously see it as part of the problem.

A group of artists have contributed their two cents to a campaign promoting the usefulness and likability of MegaUpload – and it’s a rather impressive group of artists at that. P. Diddy, Snopp Dogg, Alicia Keys, Kanye West, Lil Jon, Jamie Foxx, Brett Ratner and Mary J Blige are just a few of the stars that have voiced their support for the site in an incredibly odd yet somehow catchy song aptly titled “The Mega Song.”

As WebProNews’ Shaylin Clark noted:

The video was produced entirely by Megaupload, and contains no content owned by any other party. That fact, however, did not stop Universal from reporting the video to YouTube for copyright infringement. YouTube immediately took down the video. When Megaupload re-posted it, UMG again reported it, resulting in a second takedown of the video and threats by YouTube to suspend Megaupload’s account as a repeat offender.

Today, the Hollywood Reporter is reporting that Megaupload has dropped its suit against UMG.

Of course, Megaupload has been in the news a lot since that suit was filed. The site was taken down by the Justice Department, which led to Anonymous taking down multiple government sites.

The site’s founder “Kim Dotcom” was arrested on Friday in New Zealand, and today, Reuters shared some comments from Detective Inspector Grant Wormald from the Organised and Financial Crime Agency New Zealand:

“Despite our staff clearly identifying themselves, Mr Dotcom retreated into the house and activated a number of electronic-locking mechanisms.”

“Once they gained entry into this room, they found Mr Dotcom near a firearm which had the appearance of a shortened shotgun. It was definitely not as simple as knocking at the front door.”

According to the report, firearms were seized, as well as over $8 million from financial institutions, and the FBI reportedly claims Dotcom made $42 million from Megaupload in 2010 alone.

Apparently, Dotcom has been arrested on insider trading and embezzlement charges in the past, as well.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Add another major site to the list, as Anonymous has just taken down Universal Music’s site. The group also took credit for taking down the Department of Justice’s site earlier this afternoon

This is in response to the DOJ / ICE takedown of filesharing site MegaUpload earlier today.

This story is developing…

UPDATE: 5:09 pm EST – A little bit of bragging:

Due to what it claims is a failure to receive any royalty kickbacks, EMI Music Publishing has filed a lawsuit against Grooveshark’s parent company, Escape Media Group. The New York Times explains:

In the suit, filed in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, EMI seeks unspecified damages. But in a series of recent e-mails and legal correspondence included with the filing as evidence, EMI asks Grooveshark for at least $150,000 in royalties.

Grooveshark says its service is legal under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a federal law that protects Internet companies that host third-party material if they comply with take-down notices from copyright holders.

EMI is the fourth corner of the major music label square – the other three being Sony Music, Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group – that is suing Grooveshark over licensing and copyrighting issues.

According to a statement provided to The Times, Grooveshark believes that “this is a contract dispute that we expect to resolve.” While that’s an optimistic outlook, this latest legal action against Grooveshark leaves little to look forward to in the future as they’re now involved in litigation battles on four separate fronts. Personally, I don’t like this news and hope Grooveshark can resolve these issues because if they disappear I’m gonna be left without a dealer to get my Philip Glass fix. Having said that, it doesn’t look good for home team.

Challenged to provide proof their right to have the video removed, UMG sent YouTube’s legal department a letter in which they effectively claimed that a special agreement with YouTube meant that they did not need to have a specific copyright claim on a video’s content in order to have it removed via the content management system.

In the course of preparing this morning’s story I sent requests for comment to YouTube, and to Kelly Klaus, the lawyer for UMG who sent the letter. While no response from Mr. Klaus has been forthcoming, I just received a response from a YouTube spokesperson, who had this to say:

Our partners do not have the right to take down videos from YT unless they own the rights to them or they are live performances controlled through exclusive agreements with their artists, which is why we reinstated it.

There you have it. UMG did not have any exclusive agreement with YouTube that would allow them to remove the video.

Today, court documents have surfaced showing UMG’s defense of its actions. Early this week YouTube’s legal director, Lance Kavanaugh, apparently sent UMG a letter demanding that the company either provide evidence of its ownership of the video or forfeit its copyright claim. UMG’s response, written by Kelly M. Klaus of Munger, Tolles & Olson, claims first of all that UMG took YouTube’s “statements to be self-effectuating and decided to take no further action.” In other words, when presented with an ultimatum to either prove or forfeit its copyright claim, UMG chose to forfeit its claim by not responding. YouTube apparently sent a follow-up letter, reiterating its request, to which UMG responded with this letter. What we have here, then, is a tacit admittance of what everybody already knew: UMG does not own the Megaupload video, and has no copyright claim to the video.

Most interesting, however, is UMG’s second line of defense. Mr. Klaus’s letter takes exception to the demand for copyright proof from YouTube. The paragraph in question is too good to quote piecemeal:

Second, your letter could be read to suggest that UMG’s rights to use the YouTube “Content Management System” with respect to certain user-posted videos are limited to instances in which UMG asserts a claim that a user-posted video contains material that infringes a UMG copyright. As you know, UMG’s rights in this regard are not limited to copyright infringement, as set forth more completely in the March 31, 2009 Video License Agreement for UGC Video Service providers, including without limitation in Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(g) thereof.

So, let’s break that down a little. Wading through the legalese, it looks as though UMG is citing this Video License Agreement to claim that it has the right to take down video content that it doesn’t own. Exactly what grounds UMG thinks it does need, however, remain unclear. What does seem clear is UMG’s only possible reason to remove the Megaupload video is simply that they don’t like it. So, in effect, UMG is claiming that this nebulous agreement with YouTube allows it to remove YouTube content for any reason at all.

In preparing this story I sent requests for comment both to Mr. Klaus and to YouTube. As yet there has been no response from either. Look for updates later in the morning if they respond.

EMI joins Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment in what is being called the "Hulu for music videos." So far Vevo has not reached a licensing agreement with Warner Music Group.

EMI will not hold a stake in Vevo unlike Universal and Sony. Users will be able to watch music videos from artists on EMI’s labels including Astralwerks, Blue Note, Capitol and Virgin, as well as the independent artists and labels represented by EMI Label Services and EMI’ Caroline Distribution unit.

"Our agreement with EMI Music marks a milestone in our mission to provide fans everywhere with the world’s best premium music video programming, when, where and how they want it," stated Rio Caraeff, President & CEO of VEVO.

"We look forward to collaborating with EMI on introducing our users to new professionally-created entertainment products through a truly interactive platform.

Vevo will be powered by YouTube and the content will be made available on the site, on Vevo, and through a special branded embedded player. The video service will also act as a syndication platform for additional sites, expanding the reach of the Vevo brand online.

In October Vevo signed on AT&T as its first major advertiser. The announcement did not include details about ad revenue sharing, but AT&T said it would support Vevo’s services across multiple connected platforms.

Related Articles:

> Vevo Gets Official Launch Date

> YouTube is Going Through Changes

> MTV Offering…Music Videos?

> AT&T Strikes Ad Deal With Vevo

Vevo is striving to be the Hulu for music videos. Watch this guy talking about the launch party (not the woman pictured):

Members of the site’s "VIP pre-launch mailing list" received the following email:

Dear member of the VEVO VIP pre-launch mailing list,

All the best,
Team VEVO

Hulu itself is just starting to get its feet wet with music videos. This week, the site entered an agreement with record label EMI, and already has a channel set up for EMI artist Norah Jones. More EMI artists will follow in time. Vevo on the other hand, should have a much greater catalog of music videos to choose from when it launches.

Related Articles:

> YouTube and Universal Making a Music Video Site?

> YouTube is Going Through Changes

> MTV Offering…Music Videos?

> AT&T Strikes Ad Deal With Vevo

The momentum this gives the video site is very real as it looks to jump on a position in the market that perhaps YouTube may be too late to the game on. YouTube has just started to strike deals with the major media producers and their lineup of available programs to watch is not as impressive as Hulu’s.

Another player that may be left in the dust is CBS. They currently show their productions on their own site and through TV.com. While they may feel like they have more control they are now on the outside looking in as FOX, NBC and ABC can be viewed on Hulu. For now this service is only available in the US much to the consternation viewers elsewhere in the world.

Now ABC shows like Lost and Desperate Housewives will be available to view online via Hulu. The sheer volume of the offering on Hulu by striking these big deals is far bigger than just the straight network plays. The days of the TV only companies are long gone. The shows on ABC are just one part of the gigantic Disney media machine that is searching for ways to get distribution in the widely decentralized market that exists in the Internet age.

In what can be viewed as a statement that shows the maturation of the media industry and the realization that they may actually be able to help each other, Jeff Zucker, president and CEO, NBC Universal said

“Hulu has shown that if you make quality content available on the web and combine it with an unbeatable user experience, viewers will come, and so will advertisers. The addition of some of the best content Disney/ABC has to offer will only enhance Hulu’s standing as a top site for high quality video entertainment.”

Maybe it’s as true in business as in reality where all ships do actually rise with the tide. By grasping that fact and working with it rather than fighting against it the future of broadcast content delivery may be more wide open than anyone imagined. Keep tuning in to find out.

Comments

Original article 03/05: The number one video site in the US and the world’s largest music label are said to be cooking up a deal and a new service. YouTube and Universal Music Group are reportedly in talks to create a premium online music video service.

YouTube has been the go to site for music videos for many people for years. The problem with that is that the music videos there are not legally supposed to be there. This often leads to them getting pulled and makes it frustrating for users, and hard for them to rely on the site for finding the music videos they’re looking for.

In the later part of last year, MTV launched music video site MTVmusic.com. A quick look at Compete data illustrates quite a decline in interest in that since its launch.

There’s no decline to be found with YouTube though, and perhaps that is why a music video site makes good sense there. People are going to continue searching for music videos with YouTube. Why not provide them?

The site would operate separately from YouTube.com, but I would have to imagine it would receive heavy promotion from YouTube itself, driving the users looking for music videos to it. It should be more popular than music video pioneer MTV’s site right out of the bag.

Yinka Adegoke with Reuters reports, "The deal would ideally be broadened out to include videos by artists at the other major music labels — Sony Music, EMI Group and Warner Music Group — in a concept similar to the TV shows available on NBC Universal and News Corp’s Hulu.com."

Keep in mind, the whole deal is only in talks at this point. So let’s not make too much where there isn’t anything. That said, there is a name that the potential service is being referred to as – Vevo.

YouTube has also been getting involved with other content partners like MGM, Disney, and most recently, Sony Pictures, with which it is in talks with for full-length feature films. 

YouTube is reportedly also in the process of switching to a more Hulu-like design. ClickZ recently reported:

According to two sources familiar with Google’s plans for YouTube, the new design will do away with the current navigation scheme — which funnels users into "videos," "channels," and "community" categories. That layout will be replaced with a tabbed navigation with clearly defined sections for professional content.

The new design will offer four tabs: Movies, Music, Shows, and Videos. The first three tabs will display premium shows, clips, and movies from Google’s network and studio partners, all of which will be monetized with in-stream advertising. Meanwhile the Videos channel will house amateur and semi-pro content of the sort major brand advertisers have shied away from.

YouTube will still have the user-generated content it has become known for of course. ClickZ’s Zachary Rodgers was told that they’d be putting up walls between all the user-generated stuff an the "brand-safe content." YouTube’s player will also be more like Hulu’s (below) in the sense it will show markers where ads will appear in the progress bar.

It sounds to me like YouTube is going to become kind of like YouTube-meets-Hulu. I wonder if TV shows will enter the mix. Perhaps Hulu should think about offering a user-generated content area.