YouTube co-founder Chad Hurley delivered a speech at MIPCOM aimed at alleviating distributors’ fears over online distribution. It’s mostly not very interesting, however, the rights management portion caught my attention:
Hundreds of millions of people around the world were able to engage and experience the Olympics online, many of whom never had never had the opportunity to see the Games on their televisions. All of this took place while NBC, the broadcaster that owned the rights to the Olympics in the US, effectively used our Video ID technology to monitor and quickly block copyrighted Olympic content uploaded to the site.
Later, he expands on the details of this technology:
From the very beginning, we’ve been committed to working with content owners to make sure YouTube remains a platform for distribution, not unauthorized uploads. In fact, over 300 media companies, including NBC, RAI, Formula One, the Olympics and Lionsgate are using innovative products like YouTube’s Video Identification tool to better manage their presence on our site. Along with the other tools in our Content management system, Video ID helps content owners decide whether to block, promote, or even generate revenue from their content. Read the entire speech on TechCruch>>
This kind of technology puts control into the corporate hands to decide what you can and cannot upload. I’m thinking that whether or not a content producer has a fair use claim for something they want to show, it could be pulled by a corporate cog because it contains their material. There is no judgement involved. There are a couple of interesting pieces from The Center for Social Media on this issue, A Case of Selective Censorship and Unauthorized: The Copyright Conundrum in Participatory Video.
Tags: center for social media, digital rights, fair-use, YouTube
3 Responses
Brian
October 17th, 2008 at 12:32 am
1Afraid it doesn’t matter. YouTube is not a public forum, it’s a private website with private ownership and private liability for lawsuits. The content producer is free to upload their content elsewhere on the internet and claim fair use.
Agnes Varnum
October 18th, 2008 at 12:49 am
2That is true. My reason for pointing out the issue for independent media artists, the audience for this blog, is to consider the content and distribution of their work. I personally try to support organizations and business models that promote free speech, as opposed to policies that are geared toward corporate control of content, point of view and in turn, what I can see.
I value independent voices, and some of the most interesting perspectives in online video quote from other sources to create new points of view, so it concerns me when a platform like YouTube values it’s corporate partners over the artists in the community they cultivate. I don’t mean to elevate the frequent, blatant uploading of someone elses’ work, which is why I mention that judgment should still be a part of the process.
Independent artists might very well need YouTube more than YouTube needs them. But, that might not always be the case.
Ron
October 21st, 2008 at 11:20 am
3YouTube ran into trouble when they did not have a system to allow networks and film makers access to stop intellectual property theft. I think the new system is much more balanced and you know in the long run this will allow more starving artists to get real world exposure.
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
Get Posts by Email
Categories
Guest Bloggers
Recent Comments
Looking At: Jazz
Benny Goodman: Adventures in the Kingdom of SwingVideo Widget by Daiko
Media Art Fellowships
Anniversary Shorts - Free by Jem CohenVideo Widget by Daiko
Renew Fellows on the Web