It is so easy to shift over to Vimeo. So you can take that weak argument and shove it. They don't have to rely on YouTube in this day and age regardless of the amount of traffic. Indie artist don't even get any sort of front page coverage.

adele, arctic monkeys, kendrick lamar, tyler the creator

He isn't here for the argument. He's a contrarian. Ignore him.

Yes because those artists are in desperate need of more exposure.

Who watches Vimeo? Nobody, that's who. Youtube is the site for videos, and everything else is in a distant last place, so just because you can potentially change a web page by clicking your mouse doesn't mean that their potential viewership isn't going to take a nosedive off of a cliff.

And front page coverage is great and all, but most of their viewership would probably come from people who might be watching a video for the Strokes and then see some arbitrary indie band they've never heard of in the recommendations and click on that. Unless they're on Vimeo where they'll probably only be discovered by somebody's dog.

Those other alternatives aren't going to be so last place now because this issue will drive people to the alternatives.

No it won't. Youtube is Youtube. It would take an association with Osama Bin Laden to break their stranglehold on internet videos.

It is so easy for another site to step up and make themselves a safe haven for indie artists to go to and take some of the traffic that Youtube was getting by people are too cool to be listening to other artists that happen to be on mainstream labels.

Is it easy to get exposure on other site? Kind of. Maybe. Is it easy to get the kind of exposure you'd get on Youtube? ****in' no way in hell.