Gift/Song Sponsorship?

:-)

Okay, sticking my neck out and joining the message boards... posting something to think about.

What about introducing sponsorship of songs? Instead of people... and making these songs open to all? regardless of blue or gold?

You know, personally, I'm really, really sad about the Showtunes situation, we don't seem to have made any progress in the five to six months of asking after the staff/directorship asking us to make specific requests for any songs we'd like to see added to the website... it's always there's some in the pipeline, licensing issues etc, etc... and then we get High School Musical and Grease instead of anything on the requested list.

These songs are most obviously available to sell to the public from ebay, Amazon etc. So, it's not that they don't exist! Can you tell us in plain English the costs involved adding a whole musical, like Wicked or Rent, ie hidden costs, break it down to a feasible number of sponsors needed to make it possible and a bearable price, set up a totaler saying we need target number - sponsors ... I'm sure people out there might like the idea of sponsoring a song? I dunno maybe not, but anyway if it gets the songs here faster it might be an idea! It's not different from us going to the places that sell the backing tracks online in the end and a perfect way of sharing something wonderful too.

I just wondered if it was possible?

That way we get what we are looking for and you get happy singers...

Ditto for any genre or specific requests.

I've pulled out Showtunes because it has been an ongoing request for so long and feel the frustration. It is also a perfect example of a whole selection of 'quality' songs being added.

Thanks for reading. I'll go hide now.

Quote

EDIT: ^^^ Hi Dani, thank you for dropping in...

I don't know enough to know about whether there are other issues re adding songs... was just opening this up as a possibility for general discussion and interested to know if others felt similarly... just to gauge interest? No doubt we will be told... hopefully.

One of my main interests is folk music and it's very poorly represented and my favourite song here Diamonds and Rust was taken away the other day in the latest cull.

So, I certainly agree about the loss to licensing problems with songs. There's nothing more heartbreaking than singing a song with a dedication for someone special in your life to see the backing track you chose closed off yet three others still there. And yeah, a lot of the best artists are no longer available but I have heard people mentioning they are available on other karaoke websites. Still remain confused on that issue. What is so different about here other than paying members possibly... if sponsorship of songs took that element away and opened up possibilities wouldn't that be better?

As I said, naive on the law side... not even sure where to read about it or I would.

Thanks for reading anyhow.

EDIT: Would really like to have clarified, are we losing songs (unable to have some artists) because of paid membership causing licensing restrictions? - and the paid membership perk is no adverts? I think maybe I would prefer adverts over losing songs and artists ... :(

Edited on December 3, 2008 at 1:27 PM Quote

I'm just sad they moved the thread... seems some things are open to thought and discussion, (such as beliefs and politics) others aren't... this wasn't a plea for another effect from the staff/owners as a bonus as in Ooo I have an idea!? - it was a general interest in whether it was a) possible and b) of any interest to general members of the website. Would they support such an idea?

Now I think I'll never know. LOL...

Edited on December 3, 2008 at 2:24 PM Quote

LOL Okay karaokegod73, I guess my blue er membership sticks out like a sore thumb. I am not stupid you know, I know that you cannot have everything without cost. I did not advocate 'nothing' option... I was trying to work round just why there are issues if there were not so many issues prior to the gold membership - why other websites manage to keep their songs and this one can't? It's not a negative criticism, I come in with an open mind.

So, what I am seeing is exactly what I expected ... techsupport replies and not too many general members thoughts.

As to right on Rob? What? What is right on?

I'm very grateful that Rob at least took the time to try and vocalise something for me.

I'm going to try and break down what I do not understand.

"The licensing restrictions are because of the online content. Many songs are available on CD-G's but cant be streamed over the internet for online karaoke...."

I am not asking you specifically Rob, but can someone explain why? If they are being sold and licensed legally?

"Some sites do still have content removed from SS. There are many reasons this can happen. They could have previous licensing that does not specifically prohibit online use."

What is this licensing and could SS obtain it to safeguard further songs being hit? And this does not explain the multiple backing tracks for songs now being taken away - surely the same issues should affect all versions? I am very naive and will again say this is not an attack, I just need to hear in childlike terms the reasoning... why it is okay to still have some, and is it possible to replace the likes of artists wiped completely from the website this way?

"Their licensing may have a clause that states it cant be changed. Or the license may state that changes wont be retroactive, so if the licensing changes it wont affect any content already online."

Could SS have this clause again to protect the excellent provision it already has?

Rob, I really, really appreciate your time you took to look sensibly at my query and try to answer it.

Again, I have nothing against paid membership, I certainly understand this website must have huge costs - just looking at the content it must build on a daily basis through usage and bandwidth.

I am just very interested in whether there are any loopholes which could turn round the recent events of songs being frozen and of course new content not being added in specific areas.

That's why I suggested gift/sponsorship. Not necessarily as an alternative? Surely those who pay now would not object to making the same payment on a regular basis in sponsorship? It's the same really when it comes down to it? We do not buy or own Singsnap. All the rights remain here. We merely make a token acknowledgment of the service we are using.

Quote

"I have no idea what you are trying to ask for as a change. Almost sounds to me like by sponsoring songs you mean dropping "gold only" songs, and leaving the other benefits only (which isn't just *"no advertisements" by the way), and leaving gold members to pay the same fee for less benefits over the free membership than before."

Nope, where did I say that? Just out of interest? Again you latch on to 'my' blue membership, me thinks. ;-) You clearly do not know me. Not at all! This isn't about blues and golds, although I really am sick to death of seeing people make everything so.

"The ones that get the attention are "gold only" songs and the feature page placement, and for a while the Friday feature theme where new songs were featured, which kept blues off the page for the day. These are the obvious areas of interest to people, and therefore the best ways to target blues to become golds, until some other feature that can't be done without comes along."

Why do you want to see blues kept off feature?

Just a little throw in here, I do not think 'Feature' or 'gold' songs are the main assets of the site.

I rarely look at feature... I go to my favs, new songs and word of mouth... and join Everyone's a Winner challenges which do not involve judgment, and I've listened to masses of talent on here. Masses... I'm not interested in self promotion or gaining brownie points. I come here because I am amazed at the talent, and being able to just peacefully get to know people.

Gold songs? They seem mostly to be Zoom tracks, a lot of which I do not know, but then, I'm hopeless with titles and delight when someone sings one and I can say wow I know that, that's great, (as with all songs)...and some of which can't touch the quality of the older blue versions... as to content... I haven't even scraped the surface of some of the fantastic blue songs on offer. I am not dissatisfied, I'm actually ecstatic about what is on offer allowing free membership.

"As for sites and karaoke disks that have these songs, perhaps they are waiting for an actual threat of legal action instead of being more cautious and compliant, as this site claims to be doing."

I am delighted that Singsnap is cautious and compliant...

My purpose in questioning is looking at ways in which we as members can support growth.

If people become dissatisfied they leave... I don't want that. And it is the gold members who are leaving more recently or I see becoming discontent. :(

I am not one to grumble about not having enough for myself... that's not my way - I see here an interactive community I really haven't seen anywhere else on the net. One which is welcoming to all ages, and all levels - people with a common love of music.

I came from a computer magazine internet forum exploring interactivity... I moderate there. This site was so good, it dragged me away... and I get teased when I go back... yeah they are a fantastic bunch like this website. Just happens I love singing so much, I am ignoring my coding skills LOL. ;-)

Anyway, I hope that helps you understand more about my motive... it is not to disclaim, destroy, criticize, put down anything happening here, it's about understanding how we, part of the community can help.

*no adverts? Couldn't care less. Use Firefox and adblocker... don't have to see them.

BUT, having said that, some of those adverts are mighty interesting. The Bandmix one for instance, yeah I check stuff out... I've seen some local bands set up which maybe one day I might get brave enough to step out and put feelers into. I already have ventured out in this way BECAUSE OF THIS WEBSITE and particular friends who have encouraged me, and sing publicly with a 26 member strong brass band for charitable organisations.

So I'm having a lot of fun. ;-) I guess you could call me one of those people who take advantage of what is free in life - like air, and use it to its full... doesn't mean I don't give though... I just chose to do it in a different fashion.

Thanks for your post.

Quote

I understand where you are coming from, but I'm not saying everyone pay, I'm saying specific requests.

I give the example of putting a whole musical such as 'Wicked' or 'Rent' on here. It has been requested.

So, if we are shown the true cost and if it is legally possible, would people of their own choosing say yes, I really want to be able to sing those songs, I'd be willing to sponsor one of them or part of one of them... put a thread up saying this is the total we need... people anonymously donate and reach that target.

But until we know whether it is legally viable it remains an idea/stab in the dark, and also until you can gauge where there is indeed a niche/market for it, it doesn't hold any value... you may have blue members who would willingly do this because it really is a feature, and does not set anyone apart statuswise etc.

Quote

Hmmm. Yes, I can well imagine that $0.20 debit would not be viable... I too am freelance/self employed and have tried to think about invoicing online using paypal and worldpay and you do lose a certain amount if you do not increase the price to justify the admin costs... people still seem to prefer old fashioned ways. Maybe there could be a minimum credit system, whereby you pay a certain amount and chose what you want, remaining in credit should there not be a song you wish to use at the moment?

I do not know how songs are currently licensed ie does the site get them for life or per month? I would imagine a one off payment is best policy, but hmmm. I wonder if there were a price on the song, not dis-similar to that of iTunes available to blue members to access songs currently available to gold members, people might just go for that, and in the long term realize it is cheaper to be a monthly member.

The problem I imagine with membership is that people, even when it is as low as $7 whatever are not always in a position to make a commitment to a direct debit, be for financial or moral/personal grounds... and so chose not to join. They are not all out for the 'free lunch' so to speak... But also have occasions when they can stretch to one off payments knowing they don't have to worry about anything going pearshaped overnight. Say, a birthday monetary gift... they might treat themselves to some tracks? I don't know if there is any logic in what I am saying, I hope there is.

I just wondered if there was a licensing payment structure too... I know from my own enquiries that I am allowed to self-publish with the artists/managers discretionary permission if I am not seeking or being paid for my cover of their song and acknowledge the original artist, not claim it to be my own. And how do people get to perform for real, surely they have to have permission... I'm sure it is a huge headache when it comes down to the thousands of songs available... and if iTunes can sell these to use and Youtube can host covers, well, there must be someway of doing things...

There are people who make professional backing tracks for audition purposes. I just don't understand the ins and outs of what is permitted and what isn't... (and policing of the net seems to be a huge job and fairly slack/fuzzy at the moment too).

The problems all seem to come in when someone turns an idea into a business and profit and charges come in. And that is not me blaming Singsnap for wanting to make a profit!

In the photography world, and software, there are such things as Open Source/Common Licenses whereby people seemingly love coding/taking pictures whatever LOL and 'giving' this over for everyone else's use. Take Microsoft Office and OpenOfficeOrg?

I have read questions on places saying:

"I wish to use one of your tracks in a television programme / commercial CD / radio station etc. Do I need an additional license?
Yes – you (or the party broadcasting or using our track) will need to contact us and arrange an additional license..."

So, I am presuming licenses are available?

Can the additional license be sponsored? I really am stabbing in the dark here, but surely there is some way?

If this all looks garbled I apologize, I will edit once I press submit, it's hard to think 'outside the box' I type in - to pose a pun!

Quote

I guess this was the right place to put the question in. Succinct answer... thread over.

Quote