Viacom is suing YouTube and its parent company, Google, for “massive intentional copyright infringement.” Since the complaint, YouTube has voluntarily removed Viacom content — more than 100,000 video clips. But more clips keep appearing.
The effort to maintain a hold on copyright law when dealing with the Internet appears futile. But is there a way to embrace the technology yet still be able to pay writers, musicians, artists and other creatives for their work?
Posted by Patrice Hein
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- parkay on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- parkay on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/24
13 Comments
Fast computers to check it out. And Google knows fast.
Can’t YouTube have someone checking submitted videos for copyrighted material before they post them?
I think YouTube is the Video Equivalent of Napster. Eventually all of this will end just like Napster. That is, people will be required to pay a fee for obtaining licenses to view the material and/or download it.
Nothing surprising there, just evolution of the Internet.
YouTube is killer with just the regular guy videos. No need to rip off copyright stuff. That smells like getting something for nothing (and your chicks for free).
There are probably much smarter people than I when it comes to checking things like this, however to have a person check every submitted video would probably improbable. The sheer volume of videos they get, makes that so I’m sure.
However, I do believe more can be done: watermarking video streams for one could be an idea. This way a copied video would contain the watermark, which could later be identified by some utility used by YouTube(or other services). Further, that could also be used to pay royalties or such to the rightful copyright owners.
Beyond that, not much I can think of. I’m certain there are more efficient ways of accomplishing this, and well that would be currently out of my league. Ask me about robotic vision on the other hand…
First, so far as I know, you can only view video on YouTube which makes it different from Napster where you actually downloaded and stored songs. Secondly, as far as artist “getting paid”, they get paid plenty. Don’t cry any tears for them. Most are millionaires many times over. There is a secret that few people know about the REAL world of music and that is the artist make little or no money off records and CDs. Almost all that money goes to the record company because the record company charges ALL the cost of production, promotion and distribution against the sales of the CD or album. You have to sell a ton of records to make your first dime. The fact is that artist get about 90% of their money from the road. That is why you see so many bands that have not made a record in years on the road all the time. I think that someday soon artist will bypass the record company all together and just put their stuff on the net.
I will be the first to admit that I have downloaded songs off the internet via Limewire. And the thing is that if the RIAA would follow the advice of Bill Gates and do away with Digital Rights Management, I would gladly pay them the dollar for a song. But I am not going pay for a song that will only play on one MP3 player and not another nor allow me to make a CD copy of the song for my car if I so desire. That is not acceptabloe for me. If I buy it, it is mine to do with as I want so long as it does not involve distribution to others.
You tube is already Polices for content, be it by private groups, self righteous do-gooders, whom ever.I am sure there would be some willing to spend their time without pay searching out copyright violations.
Actually, you can capture video from YouTube and download them to a file on your PC. YouTube doesn’t give one such a tool, but there are 3rd party tools out there that enable this.
Its time for the copyright laws to be ripped from the books. It is now IMPOSSIBLE to enforce them. I will bet every single one of you violate copyright laws at least once a day.
People like me do it dozens of times a day. Tough… Just because some company produces something and the second it airs it on TV or the internet, it should become public domain. Enough is enough from the greedy content producers.
Youtube is the perfect place to find funny, original, and yes even copyrighted material. I have started watching some new shows because of clips that have been posted on the internet. Also by comparison it was fun to find Dana Carvey’s skit with Choppin Broccoli without having ot rent the DVD or buy it. I hadn’t seen it in years and without waiting for it to be rerun on Comedy Central or shelling out bucks to rent or buy it, it was a great find. The television shows should all be put online anyway. ABC does it with its current shows and so does NBC and other networks. They could still do commercials and make money that way by inserting them into the video feed.
Tony,As an artist, I don’t think copyright laws should be scrapped altogether, but they need to be rewritten in ways that permit the free flow of information while prohibiting people and corporations from marketing an artist’s work as their own.U-tube, limeware etc. are forums for artist appreciation and promotion in the electronic era. What is needed are new ways for artists to get compensation for their efforts other than being exploited by corporate interests.
Heck, I’m off to YouTube now to go watch Choppin Broccoli. That was freakin hilarious.