 |
 | 
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
 ·Corporate Colocation
| Re: If it can't survive w/o breaking law - good riddance said by TK Junk Mail  :But it will survive, because Google will sign deals compensating music and movie and TV companies to keep their products online. And there will still be millions of people who will want to upload videos of their last cookout or birthday party Yes, but will other people watch them? Probably not.
Less eyes means less advertising revenue. | |
|
| 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| I read a post somewhere (probably on Slashdot) hypothesising that Google might make deals with the content owners to upload clips legally for promotional purposes with an option to buy. YouTube and Google already have great name recognition. Imagine if you could see a music video on YouTube (compressed for the web, of course) and then click on a link to buy the DVD of the video, or the CD of the album. Or, imagine being able to see a small scene of a movie on YouTube and then having a link to click for the movie.
Perhaps the music industry could even legitimize the fan made music videos that exist on YouTube by getting Google to put up "Buy This Song" links to Amazon, iTunes, Napster, wherever. This way, fans could still be creative with the music and the recording industry would get some money flow from it. The music industry could think of it as free promotion of the songs instead of thinking of it as piracy. | |
|
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
| Re: If it can't survive w/o breaking law - good riddance I believe google plans on using an ad revenue share. So x% of whatever add revenue generated during copyrighted material display go's to so-in-so contractee. In this way it remains profitable for google, and provides additional profit to copyright holders. | |
|
| | |
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| Re: If it can't survive w/o breaking law - good riddance Even that method might assuage some copyright holders. Of course, there will always be copyright holders who foam at the mouth whenever they see anything resembling their work online.
And there will be copyright owners who just don't care for the most part. Like Weird Al. After AOL balked at the "World Premiere" for his White & Nerdy video due to it being leaked on YouTube, he simply linked to the YouTube version from his site. The consequence was, tons of people (me for one) loved seeing the video and rushed out to buy his CD. (Ok, I haven't bought the CD yet, but it is on my "must buy" list and that's tough for a CD to get on. Few new CDs make it.) | |
|
| | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by Ahrenl :I believe google plans on using an ad revenue share. So x% of whatever add revenue generated during copyrighted material display go's to so-in-so contractee. In this way it remains profitable for google, and provides additional profit to copyright holders. but if you take everything down that people go there for, ad revenue wont be there and youtube will just go away like all these other sites that were good until money came along and ruined them.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: If it can't survive w/o breaking law - good riddance They wouldn't have to take anything down if they are PAYING the copyright holder... | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| You know...? Does it matter? Two boys make a site, site becomes popular, site is sold, two boys make a billion - site is killed for what it was (like so many sites are) boys are still rich.
I wonder if the founders, at this point, care. 
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
z00medu
join:2005-04-12
Chicago, IL | figures...... tell me who DIDNT see this coming....... | |
|
| 
Jameson
1010
Premium
join:2004-05-28
Fallbrook, CA
clubs:  | Re: figures...... bye bye youtube | |
|
|
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
·Corporate Colocation
| Re: Beginging of the end said by r81984 :You Tube is not selling any content so there are no royalties to sue over, and if you cannot prove YouTube cost your company money in lost sales, then stop your bitching and be glad people want to actually watch your copyrighted material. No, but they are making money by people watching the copyrighted material via advertising. | |
|
| | 
dadkins
Land of Confusion
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | Re: Beginging of the end Ads? WTF are ads?
I don't see ads here... on either laptop.  | |
|
| | |
| | | 
cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27
Levittown, PA
| Re: Beginging of the end Huh?
The advertisers are making the money, unless the road builders owned the land they put the signs on. Then they would lease the land to the advertisers. But who funds the enforcers? We do. In taxes.
Next.
I see this as the old "Let the fans be our marketing". Everyone wins. The content, the artist, the industry, the web and the fans. Only ones not winning is the chump who said "buying YouTube...". | |
|
| | | 
Go_Offline
join:2001-10-12
Surprise, AZ
| Though your's wasn't bad, any physical analogy falls short due to practical limitations that just don't exist in the electronic/digital realm.
The problem is rarely a question of simple legality, but, instead, scale.
In the case of your comparison, imagine if there WAS one road (or better: city) where the risk of being cited for racing was minimal and even if you were "caught", you were simply told to stop and go home.
What would happen? EVERY racer, ricer, rodder, and regular joe/jane from the ENTIRE WORLD would converge there. And who would be financially responsible for the spate in injuries/deaths? Not to mention the maintenance nightmare from the sudden influx of millions of people and vehicles? And, if no one, then how long would that city be attractive and viable as a destination for such a pursuit?
But the worldwide revolution of computers+internet has left media conglomerates caught completely with their drawers around their ankles. And has led to the common person becoming a common criminal. (Whether you AGREE with the law doesn't negate it.)
I've never heard/read any analogy that adequately and honestly addresses issues such as this (especially pirating.)
Any more takers?
--
I'm on a quest to overthrow ignorance. | |
|
| | | | karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
·Fairpoint Communic..
| Re: Beginging of the end "And has led to the common person becoming a common criminal. (Whether you AGREE with the law doesn't negate it.)"
And that is the crux of the matter. Copyright laws have made EVERYONE a criminal. And when everyone is a criminal, they don't care about the laws. It's exactly the same 'broken window' philosophy that works in the real world. You see joe blow downloading, so you download.
The solution, of course, is to change the law. Remember, the US doesn't control the WORLD. The us controls the US. The **AssAsses can't shut down the pirate bay, becuase the pirate bay ISN'T BREAKING THE LAW. | |
|
| |
| | 
tim_k
Buttons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow
Premium
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
| Re: Beginging of the end said by r81984 :Also, there should be no way anyone can sue YouTube for money so they should never have to pay for settlements as long as they remove copyrighted material when requested. Think about it, what stops a company from posting their copyrighted material on YouTube and then sueing YouTube for money. The only person who should be sued is the person who uploaded the copyrighted material to YouTube. Tell that to the courts who ruled against Napster. | |
|
| soothsayer15
join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX | Copyright holders were just waiting for someone with some cash flow to purchase Youtube. | |
|
| 
mocycler
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Naperville, IL
·AT&T Midwest
edit:
October 20th, @11:18PM
| I'm a former lawyer (changed careers), but I still keep up with things. At risk of all the "free advice" jokes, I'll try to contribute something here.
said by r81984 :You Tube is not selling any content so there are no royalties to sue over, and if you cannot prove YouTube cost your company money in lost sales...
You do not need to be making money to violate copyright law. Revenue has nothing to do with it. If you are duplicating or distributing copyrighted material without the holder's permission, you are breaking the law, period. If you photocopy some pages out of a library book, you are committing a copyright infringement even if no money changes hands.
Furthermore, the holder is losing money when you are giving away free downloads. Under the law, this is known as "denial of benefit." It is based on the fact that the person you gave the material to would otherwise have to pay for it...so the copyright holder is losing a sale because of you.
The bottom line is that the copyright holders did not give explicit permission to distribute these clips, so they have every right to go after YouTube and can sue for damages even if the defendant never made a penny.
If YouTube were my client, I would counsel them to remove all copyrighted material immediately, even the stuff they were not specifically asked to remove.
Hope this helps.
mocycler | |
|
CPM
join:2001-08-24
Miami, FL | Well nice to know your You Tube. Well, It was nice to know you You Tube. But, we have to depart our ways.
It is not you. It is me. | |
|
napsterization
@verizon.net
| Its tha Napsterization of YouTube Now with the napsterization of youtube, where will people go to get these videos? Back to p2p, or maybe a "bust-out" section of thepiratebay.org for video alone?!?
Who knows, but do you hear that sucking sound?
I sure hope the guys that got 1.65 billion in stock start cashing out of google, 'cause the value in youtube is going down the tube!!! | |
|
|
IronChefMoto
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Alpharetta, GA
edit:
October 20th, @01:10PM
| No more catching South Park at work I run dual monitors at work -- design/development job. I would find a South Park episode I missed the night before and catch it on YouTube on the 2nd monitor while I worked. Did this for several things that I might've missed the night before or heard about from co-workers. Maybe something that TiVO or Comcast PVR goofed up (by cutting off early).
Hell -- it was good to watch while eating lunch at my desk.
Guess I won't be doing that anymore. Damn -- now I have to find a way to concentrate on my work WITHOUT Cartman entertaining me on screen #2.
IronChefMorimoto | |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| Easy Answers "once you pull all the material from YouTube that falls under copyrights not covered by the company's distribution deals, is the site still interesting?"
No
"Can it survive lawsuits?"
No
"Can it profit?"
Ummmmm, no.
"Will incorporated ads be annoying?"
Durrrrr, I'm going to take a wild stab and say "yes".
I like how nobody ever pays attention to history anymore and just assuses that THEIR company or favored company is going to somehow be the exception... | |
|
pik45612
@optonline.net | NO NO NO! the jap clips are most of the funnys and crazy things on youtube. not to mention Jap babes | |
|
Mr Anon
@sbcglobal.net
| I think something is missing here. Those questions although good I think is missing something. What is google ultimately going to do with YouTube? We all know google had a flash based video service and that they are building out a huge network for their traffic as well as other things.
So why does google need YouTube? Specificially what is there that they can not duplicate or best?
Without knowing G's ultimate plan for the site these changes however drastic or not is like asking why plumbing is being put into a room when the whole building is being renovated.
Lastly why is no on covering whats happening with FreeDB? | |
|
| 
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: I think something is missing here. said by Mr Anon :
Those questions although good I think is missing something. What is google ultimately going to do with YouTube? We all know google had a flash based video service and that they are building out a huge network for their traffic as well as other things.
They need it because google has managed to build everything well so far except community. They bought the conversation. I wonder if they can keep it. | |
|
Telly Boot
Premium
join:2002-05-15
Vancouver, BC
·TELUS
| pig in a poke? Marge, don't tell me it's losing all worthwhile content and is completely worthless....Doh! I knew I shouldn't have spent $1.6 Billion on it. Just as well I used these lousy Google shares to buy it. [Sounds like a Simpson's episode?]
--
Dawn,n,The time when men of reason go to bed. (Ambrose Bierce.) | |
|
| |
|
| 
91439306
15,000 Watts of Bass Power
join:2002-10-16
New Milford, CT
| Re: International Sites like Daily Motion will replace YouTube Good find!
I compared the quality of the Youtube video to Daily Motion and DM is much cleaner and a higher frame rate, as this version of the video I embedded elswhere in this thread shows:
--
Take care,
Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
My Kurzweil Music at: '»www.dv-clips.com/theater.htm
'»www.basspig.com Bass Pig's Lair
'»www.mwcomms.com
'»www.adventuresinanimemusic.com Stereo Feed! | |
|
GTaylor
Premium
join:2002-12-14
Frisco, TX
clubs:
| So where are the Cuban haters now? You know who you are...time to fess up and admit Cuban was onto something. Not that it was difficult to see, anyone who watched internet radio ruined by copyright holders knew it was only a matter of time before YouTube would begin it's slide.
Sorry YouTube, loved your site but as they say in the tech world, "Next revolution please!" | |
|
Jovi
join:2000-02-24
Mount Joy, PA
 ·Comcast
| R.I.P. Sadly YouTube will not be the same. Alot of artists and movies had massive free exposure on the site. I personally would not of known of certain artists or movies without having seen it on YouTube. Why do companies have to squeeze every cent out of everyone? Do they not see how a site like this can help them while letting users show their creativitity? They will never learn. Sorry to see you go Youtube... | |
|
|
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Saw a site with all original content on a PBS Now Since gooTube is going to lose everything but dumb people with video diaries, it makes sense to find a site that is that way from day one.
This site was on PBS in a Net Neutrality segment.
»www.blip.tv/ | |
|
| 
Trinijoy
Premium
join:2005-09-12
Brick, NJ
 ·Vonage
| Re: Saw a site with all original content on a PBS Now I knew this would happen, say goobye to you youtube. Because everyone and there brothe are going to try to sue them to get money from Google. Well and they dont' care about how the public feels only who has the bigger penis in the Coporate america. By Youtube! It was nice knowing you while you lasted! | |
|
redleaf
join:2000-09-12
Fort Lauderdale, FL
| Arrgh! Wrapping themselves in the flag of piracy is what made YouTube so great.
It's like it was all a dream. | |
|
allen2404
join:2002-02-24
Brooklyn, NY | Oh no Oh no, what shall I ever do without yet another source for bizarre Japanese cartoons? | |
|
| 
Warzau
Premium
join:2000-10-26
Naperville, IL
clubs: | Re: Oh no Or those nifty english/aerobics lessons. | |
|
ronnie
join:2001-02-17
34. N 84.7 W | YouTube will be full of ads YouTube will be a repository for 30 second ads for everything...just cluttering up the once good website.
--
A good argument is spoiled when someone comes along that knows what they are talking about. | |
|
| |
|
|
|
YouTube Begins Copyrighted Clip Purge
If it can't survive w/o breaking law - good riddance
·
