It's the copyright holders who are wrong.
The fact that copyright holders are sending DMCA strikes for people who are listening to music during their stream is absurd. It's commercially absurd. It's ethically absurd and its practically absurd.
First of all the behaviour by publishers is completely against their own interests and is completely ignorant of how people consume content on the internet. This isn't surprising given that these industries are essentially dominated by boomer dinosaurs who used to sell us CDs at 30 dollars a pop (30 dollars in the 90s).
Now we can access any song we want with a click of a button. Most publishers provide a way for us to listen to their music, be it Spotify or Youtube. It's in fact really convenient and you can get many excellent versions of the same track, and the publisher gets their view.
This is how I and most people consume music on the Internet. We do not play discrete CDs, and so forth.
One way I am very certain that users do not consume music specifically is by seeking through mine or anyone elses's) twitch archive to look and listen to that song, which is probabbly mixed with in game sounds. Who the **** would do that?
So that leads me to question where is the copyright danger here?
There isn't one. This is a case of a law firm doing busy work to get paid by large copyright holders that don't really have a grasp of their accounts or their industry.
But this practice actually hurts artists and by extension their puiblishers. Why?
Because people don't get to hear their music. My generation, and the previous one tell me the same, that we don't get our music from advertising very much. Music is spread by word of mouth and by ear - a rewvolutionary concept for an aural medium.
The use of these aggressive DMCA tactics by poorly configured automated bots commissioned by lawyers who don't understand the tech or the industry is inherently self-destructive because it takes money away from sales and artists - the primary function of a music publishing business; and gives it to law firms who suppress content - and by extension sales.
Finally, the use of music in conujunction with a game stream or clips is arguably transformative. The pairing of msuic with action or visuals completely transforms and can add entirely different meaning to the work. It also can add a completely new emotional dimension.
The pairing of music in films and in advertisements is demonstrative of this. Unfortunately content creators aren't often in ap osition to challenge the perversions of U.S copyright law often enacted by large unethical companies such as music publishers and movie studios. I mean, these are studios who employed serial rapists and Nazis, but they can be trusted when it comes to copyright?
I don't think so.
One would hope that Twitch has enough market leverage now to sit down with these publishers and say: "Hey, we think you are hurting yourselves here and this "problem" is an opportunity in disguise"
Instead of removing the music, use technology to link viewers to the copyright material on youtube; link them to where they can buy it or listen to it on Google Play/Spotify etc.
That would take much less effort than this silly game of smashing their own content and silencing the free advertising/ word of mouth about their own *** products*.
I listen to music when I play, that's just the honest experience of watching me play. I don't do it for viewers, I just do it because twitch is a convenient source for uploading replays. I don't have the tools or the time to remove audio; and I'm not going to not listen to the music I don't like and own, in my own home, because Sony get upset when someone listens to one of their pedophiles on Youtube's quickplay by accident.
Working with musicians over the years, there are split feelings between many musicians. Some welcome the exposure their music gains through DJs playing their music while others feel that the internet and streaming have killed the industry. I believe it's a lack of understanding sometimes for those that oppose streaming. It all comes down to money. If the songwriters and musicians are not making money, then all the exposure in the world means nothing to some who are seeking to gain financially. It's only fair the amount of time and effort a songwriter and musician put into their songs that they make money. The problem is record labels who manage these songwriters and artist distribution of music want to blame streamers such as those on Twitch for the lack of CD sales and online purchases. The reality is it's the peformance rights organizations who collect royalties that are not paying the musicians and artists their fair share. They claim unauthorized streaming is the reason for the lack of payment. But how do they explain when they collect billions of dollars in revenue that they can only pay an artist or songwriter less than $2/month? They will always claim losses in BS claims of "unauthorized" streaming of music, but the reality is they are hiring legal firms to issue DMCA strikes with that money instead of paying the artists as Anaryl has already stated. The musicians that oppose streaming don't look at these facts because they are misled by the industry. Musicians and performers need to start putting more stress on these labels and PROs. As I mentioned in my ideas, Twitch admits in their recent email they sent out to streamers regarding DMCA that 99% of the notifications they received are for music being played in the background. If their statement is true and why would Twitch lie about it, this clearly suggests that DJs who stream music on Twitch are not even been on the radar at this point because of their such small representation Twitch in comparison to the rest of the streamers. While these streamers may be generating revenue from their streams, their profitability is not from the use of other people's music. Their profitability is due to the original content they create with their own time and efforts such as gaming, art, IRL, and sponsorship. The real issue is DMCA strikes are being issued without merit. By law, It is in the burden of the label to prove that the streamer has actually used music for their own personal gain. In 99% of the cases this is not true. It's time for push in the streaming community to put a stop to this DMCA strike nonsense and legal action taken against labels who are effortlessly having quality streamers shut down for loss of revenue.
I think to note about your statement: "Finally, the use of music in conujunction with a game stream or clips is arguably transformative. The pairing of msuic with action or visuals completely transforms and can add entirely different meaning to the work. It also can add a completely new emotional dimension."
That is why there is a synchronization right in copyright law, which prohibits the unauthorized pairing of music with visuals to create a new derivative work. Just thought I would clarity that point.
I'm a DJ and I just don't understand how any musician, or copyright holder would not want their music played for a massive audience? Talk about great exposure right? I mean, It's not like anyone can simply go to YT and hear those same songs literally anytime of the day 24/7 or anything. lol