Due to the legislative maltreatment, and essentially because we have spent too long with Soundcloud, building the archives with very little evidence, RRR will need to identify a more concrete, legally admissable, and long-term platform for sharing and archiving the shows we’ve shared over the past 2 years.
We’ll be takin some time out for a while, fundamentally to concentrate on other projects, but don’t lose faith, we’ll be back, with more dusty excitement that you can tolerate.
Expect a rewind around Spring 2016, until then….
FAO – Eric Wahlforss / Alexander Ljung, this letter is an open letter to you both. Replies in the comments or directly to email@example.com. PS: If you help the consumer, you help your company. Currently, Soundcloud are collectively opening the door and kickin the customer down a copyright wallpapered flight of stairs.
FAO – Subscribers and regular listeners. Apologies for the lack of feed, the account has understandably been terminated due to copyright infringements [even though Soundcloud have the ability and technology to avoid the problem]. Please see below.
Soundcloud have an unusually myopic and remarkably rearward approach to their paying customers, unfortunately, RRR have experienced this recently. Sadly, they have disappointed and discouraged alot of users in the past few months due to a ‘change in their approach to the industry’ and the ‘royalty deals’ they have reached in 2015, with labels like Sony and other industry behemoths. It seems this has led to a huge amount of people leaving the service. Whether by choice, or because of SC’s disappointing lack of communication skills.
At present, Soundcloud allows it’s users to share pretty much any tracks on the platform, and if there are copyright issues, they’ll get picked up by some tech software soon after theyve been uploaded, and the user will then be informed. If the actions are repeated, they will then have a ‘strike’ against their name. 3 strikes and naturally, the account will be suspended or in the case of RRR, terminated. Unfortunately, in this case, there was no dialogue, there was no discussion yet Soundclouds inability to communicate still astounds, overwhelms and disappoints me, someone that PAYS for use of their platform. Actually, that’s past tense, ‘paid’ for is more accurate.
If there is a copyright issue with a track, Soundclouds’ software recognises which tracks are copyrighted, and those which are not, and in the case of a long mix or a radio show, the majority of the songs can be shared, yet a small amount cannot. These long files can easily be edited to avoid the copyright material, and any copyright issue, but Soundcloud have decided to avoid helping the paying customer by informing them of the specific copyrighted tracks, after the event.
Soundcloud takes the users monthly fee, then informs them of the copyright problems AFTER the process of uploading and sharing the material reaches the ‘public’ status. Regrettably, exploitation is seemingly more beneficial to their objectives.
Fundamentally, Soundcloud do not offer any assistance in avoiding ‘copyright issue’ titles BEFORE physically sharing the tracks to the web, even though the technology can spot these very avoidable titles BEFORE they have gone public. If they already have the technology, surely it could be utilised before the individual tracks go public, during the ‘save’ option, therefore avoiding the rapacious connotations and loosing thousands of paying customers, no ?
Regrettably for you Soundcloud, myself and thousands of others will no longer be making payments on the Pro Plan, but what I would like to know is, if they have the technology, why would they make their successful company look intensely greedy, by taking customers money and THEN removing their ability to share non-copyrighted material ? IMO, that’s what makes them look unprofessional.