ARUNITA KANJILAL AT #8 - Page 86

Originally posted by: PV_IFhandle

Wow! Why doesn't she do more of this? Just short covers can shoot up her income!

Short is not lucrative. Her Raataan L would have earned her very little. Less than 30 sec earns nothing. Ideally 2 minutes or more. I hope she shares with PD on AAj Jaane Ki. She made good money on that! 😃

Originally posted by: Realityshow

Short is not lucrative. Her Raataan L would have earned her very little. Less than 30 sec earns nothing. Ideally 2 minutes or more. I hope she shares with PD on AAj Jaane Ki. She made good money on that! 😃

Band members probably just get a small fee and chaai-naashta 😆

Originally posted by: Realityshow

I was doing some research on YT earnings because of the craze to post videos by some idols.

The earnings matrix is complicated and differs by country, type, duration etc.

Arunita is the most successful YT uploader with 20M views on her uploads in the last 5 months.

Based on the fact that some are short videos attracting less advertising money, I would estimate that she has earned nearly Rs 2 lacs (optimistically) from her effort in 5 months. I am disregarding new views on her older uploads of which one I know flourished to 4M in the last 5 months from somewhere in the 500k zone. That should balance optimism errors.

Not bad.

Also the number of subscribers- more active she will be - more subscribers she will get. HR has increased his subscribers- more than million+ in one month by being 'very' active.

If it is not artist's original song , uploader gets no monetization benefit in youtube.

It's applicable for all cover songs of an original song too...

Originally posted by: forever_freind2

If it is not artist's original song , uploader gets no monetization benefit in youtube.

It's applicable for all cover songs of an original song too...

Thanks for that. Was not aware.

So no cover gets any money irrespective of who sang it.

But what about things like Rabindrasangeet which are out of copyright? They should be eligible for earnings, will they not be?

Originally posted by: forever_freind2

If it is not artist's original song , uploader gets no monetization benefit in youtube.

It's applicable for all cover songs of an original song too...

Welcome back.

So it means no money for all the covers put up by Arunita?

Originally posted by: forever_freind2

If it is not artist's original song , uploader gets no monetization benefit in youtube.

It's applicable for all cover songs of an original song too...

That's really bad - especially if it's not available anywhere on the YT (Not uploaded by the channel). Because you have done such a great job. And I can't thank you enough for that.🙏

Originally posted by: Realityshow

Thanks for that. Was not aware.

So no cover gets any money irrespective of who sang it.

But what about things like Rabindrasangeet which are out of copyright? They should be eligible for earnings, will they not be?

Maybe - because it is not her own cover - but she sang it for a program/TV channel

Originally posted by: Realityshow

Thanks for that. Was not aware.

So no cover gets any money irrespective of who sang it.

But what about things like Rabindrasangeet which are out of copyright? They should be eligible for earnings, will they not be?

Even for Rabindra Sangeet ,"saregama" claims audio right ,if the song earlier sung by an artist for their label.

So , they don't allow full monetization , may be some negotiation can be done on share basis.

So that means these artists need to keep putting out their own songs - that may earn a little money and there may be a chance that something will be liked by a film maker or music director and be used in a film.