You can get jewel cases in two basic sizes: standard and slim. The slim jewel case is half as thick as the standard sized jewel case, which will make for a lighter package and save storage space. However, the slim jewel case can not display a tray card, so your package will have less print space.
Watch the short video below to hear Ricky Coles explain the differences between these two types of jewel cases:
I came across an article over at TechCrunch.com about an Artist who has his ownmusic video removed from his YouTube account. Apparently, the artist made his own remixed version of one of his music videos, and posted it on his YouTube channel. It was deleted by YouTube. The artist is making public threats on his Twitter Page. Leave us a comment and let us know what you think about the video being removed, and the artist’s public response on his twitter. Make sure to check out the article.
Actually, it’s less than a penny. More like $0.000000275 pennies for a Rick Roll (if you don’t know what a Rick Roll is, then click here for an example. That probably didn’t help. Click here just to read the Wikipedia entry. Now do you get it? Good. Let’s move on). I read a blog that found an interesting story involving the Rick Roll and payments from Google/YouTube. Here’s a quick recap:
1. Old ’80s music video played on YouTube becomes internet “sensation” and attracts millions of views
2. Performing artist in this said video enjoys resurgence in popularity and even earns an MTV Europe VMA because of it
3. Co-author of song, Pete Waterman, receives very little shared revenue from music video being played on YouTube
4.Waterman complains about the lack of revenue earned from music video being played on YouTube
So where do you side on this arguement? Should this guy be paid more for this song being played so many times on YouTube? The blogger linked above doesn’t think so, and he/she makes three great points:
This video most likely loses money for Google
This song writer didn’t have to lift a finger to earn that $11 (actually, it’s pounds, but I’m not sure how to type that symbol) and wouldn’t even have the money if it weren’t for YouTube
Ads on this video are nearly worthless since most people who were “Rick Rolled” don’t actually watch the whole video or interact with the ads, especially if they’ve fallen for this joke before
Waterman grumbles that now nobody will buy this music because they can listen to it for free on YouTube. That’s somewhat true, but do you think most of the people who stumbled upon it on YouTube would have purchased a Rick Astley album anyway? Would they even know who Rick Astley is if it weren’t for this goofy internet/blogging phenomenon? Probably not. So does he think that YouTube should charge everytime somebody links up or embeds a music video? Then nobody would be “Rick Rolled,” YouTube and Google would still be making billions, Rick Astley would not have won an MTV Europe Video Music Award, and Pete Waterman’s bank account would be without 11 pounds.
I think he sees YouTube/Google making billions of dollars and believes his song contributes a larger chunk to that profit then it actually does. I can see where he may make that false assumption. There’s quite a bit of copyrighted material on YouTube that makes it a popular destination for some internet surfers. If the site only consisted of wacky home videos, the traffic may take a significant hit. However, it would still be wildly popular as the vast majority of videos are independently made and not copyrighted.
YouTube (and especially Google) is a website where the sum is greater than the parts. There is not one record company/movie studio/TV network or even all of them combined that are that important to YouTube’s survival. There are copyrighted videos pulled from the site constantly, yet YouTube’s popularity still grows. The number of bands, artists, business’s, etc. who believe they benefit from having their material on YouTube far outnumbers those who believe it hurts them.
Rick Astley or whoever controls the rights to that song could have had YouTube pull the video, but they didn’t. Now if somebody happened to feel the urge to purchase this track, there are plenty of opportunities to do so from the various widgets on the YouTube video’s page. There’s an ad that pops up on the bottom of the video viewer that you can click to buy a download from Amazon or iTunes. There’s also an ad you can click to buy a ringtone of this song. Last, if you click on the link for the official Rick Astley YouTube channel, there’s other links to buy his music within the profile.
So to Pete Waterman, I say be happy that a song you helped write was able to spawn something as cool as this:
If you are looking at COPYCATS Media quote for a CD duplication package, it can contain a lot of unfamiliar terminology. For example, your quote may include an item description like this:
CD Duplication Package - Duplicated CDRs with 1 color thermal imprint, 4 Panel Insert 4/1, Traycard 4/1, Jewel Case, Assembly, Poly-Wrap
If this is your first experience with ordering a CD duplication package, you may be quite confused by this description. To help you out, we’re going to be breaking down these descriptions and informing you what each term means. Today we’ll start with the panels.
Writing this all out would take too long and end being even more confusing, so Chris Brummund and Ricky Coles made a short video clip to explain it all. Check it out!
The stuff that pops up on YouTube never ceases to amaze me. If you go to this website, http://thru-you.com, you’ll find somebody who has taken things a step further with the YouTube platform.
Instead of recording his own material and uploading it, this user has decided to use existing YouTube videos as his source material. He finds various clips of people playing a single musical instrument, mixes them all together, and creates something so beautifully awesome, it will make you puke.
You have to love how this digital information age is fueling creativity. I can’t see this being made five years ago. I don’t even know if we had enough existing video clips of people playing an instrument alone in their living room, let alone a single outlet where one could find them all.
By way of Hypebot, I came across this Youth and Music Survey from Marrakesh Records in the UK. In the first paragraph of their introduction, they refer to their small collection of pie charts and bar graphs as “ground-breaking.” In my opinion, no new ground was broken, but the little information they provide includes a few interesting tidbits.
First, I thought I would address the claim that 60% of 16-24 year olds would rather go without sex for a week than music. It makes for eye-grabbing headline, but nothing more.
This statistic doesn’t surprise me at all. I’m sure we all can recall plenty of weeks where we’ve gone without sex, but how many weeks have we gone without music? It’s nearly impossible to imagine these days. Think about all the places where music is played or listened to:
At the gym
On the bus
In your car
At shopping malls and stores
At restaurants/bars
At your office or workplace
On the soundtracks for movies, TV shows
Radio/TV commericals
Now imagine all those scenarios in silence. It’s really eerie. Would you want to go an entire week without music?
We would probably gain more insight if young people were asked if they would rather give up television or internet over music for a week. Those are comparable media outlets that play a significant factor in many people’s lives. But that wouldn’t generate silly headlines, now would it?
Comments (0) 
Actually, it’s less than a penny. More like $0.000000275 pennies for a Rick Roll (if you don’t know what a Rick Roll is, then 
By way of