I Was Wondering How Long This Would Take
Someone is finally sueing YouTube.
I remember a friend telling me a few months ago that buying Tivo was a waste of money because you could just go to YouTube and watch whatever you wanted whenever you wanted. And I have a couple of friends who are addicted to YouTube -- they are always watching clips, hours on end. I've not gotten into the craze too much, so I don't know much about it. And I don't know anything about intellectual property laws. But it does seem to me that YouTube isn't going out of its way to stop illegal postings. (It's the copyright holder's responsibility to report any wrongdoing to YouTube, seems to be the current policy -- which seems almost backwards to me.)
Hopefully we'll get to have another Napster-like legal battle where television stars will appear before Congress to testify about intellectual property. I loved watching the drummer from Metallica testify. And he wasn't even funny. So John Stewart could really do something fun.
Anyway, a couple of quotes from the linked article:
Bruce Sunstein, co-founder of intellectual property law firm Bromberg & Sunstein in Boston, said YouTube was still in the early stages of what was likely to be a “very long working-out of arrangements” with the owners of broadcast copyrights.
“Finding a way of peaceful coexistence is quite a struggle,” Sunstein said. “Google’s motto is ’Don’t be Evil,’ and you could argue that with YouTube that motto is wearing a little thin.”
I remember a friend telling me a few months ago that buying Tivo was a waste of money because you could just go to YouTube and watch whatever you wanted whenever you wanted. And I have a couple of friends who are addicted to YouTube -- they are always watching clips, hours on end. I've not gotten into the craze too much, so I don't know much about it. And I don't know anything about intellectual property laws. But it does seem to me that YouTube isn't going out of its way to stop illegal postings. (It's the copyright holder's responsibility to report any wrongdoing to YouTube, seems to be the current policy -- which seems almost backwards to me.)
Hopefully we'll get to have another Napster-like legal battle where television stars will appear before Congress to testify about intellectual property. I loved watching the drummer from Metallica testify. And he wasn't even funny. So John Stewart could really do something fun.
Anyway, a couple of quotes from the linked article:
Bruce Sunstein, co-founder of intellectual property law firm Bromberg & Sunstein in Boston, said YouTube was still in the early stages of what was likely to be a “very long working-out of arrangements” with the owners of broadcast copyrights.
“Finding a way of peaceful coexistence is quite a struggle,” Sunstein said. “Google’s motto is ’Don’t be Evil,’ and you could argue that with YouTube that motto is wearing a little thin.”
posted by Michael Lasley | 11:26 AM
6 Comments:
TiVo could never be a waste of money -- it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. YouTube doesn't have the little "bloop" sound, which is what makes TiVo. :) That's why all the cable company "DVR" knockoff things suck too.
I love the "bloop" sound, too.
It's hard for me to gin up much concern about pirated tv shows, but ISTM it would make a difference whether the particular YouTubed program was orginally pay tv or commercial tv.
If it's pay tv, putting it on YouTube isn't just obviating the advertising; the actual product is being stolen. If it's commercial tv with the commercials left in, I'd think the advertisers would be all for it. If it has the commercials taken out, maybe not. (But, personally, I'd be inclined to tell them "tough titties" and move on.)
ISTM it'd be good for the broadcasters in at least one way: they could get hard data on numbers of viewers, instead of just Nielsen samples.
BTW, this same issue is coming up over Google's plan to put every book in the world on the internet. Publishers are not best pleased, and probably a lot of authors. OTOH, making more books available to more people is a net gain for society as a whole. To me, there's a road somewhere down the middle.
It is hard to muster much concern for the well-being of broadcast companies. And I think the intellectual property laws, whatever they are, are not well-suited for the "digital" age. But YouTube seems to be more or less flaunting their own piracy, it seems. Daring a law-suit, if you will.
Glad to hear it, Whitney. Such a great feeling. I'm back to basking! I think it will be interesting to watch, as I think it could get ugly. (And Google owns YouTube, which is apparently part of the problem -- no one really wants to take on Google.)
Long live You Tube!
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Post a Comment
<< Home