NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Interesting article: "YouTube and the Major Film Studios" (and You)
Interesting article: "YouTube and the Major Film Studios" (and You)
http://j.mp/igkaCk (Shadowlocked)
"In the course of writing lists or features, it's frequently
occurred to myself and other writers to upload a clip from a
movie to YouTube, by way of illustrating a point - and embedding
it in the article. How often this goes through smoothly and how
often it doesn't has become quite interesting in the last few
years."
- - -
A few thoughts on this. I agree with the author that "fake" users
posting materials purportedly as individuals, but actually with the
backing of the intellectual property owners, is confusing and
potentially duplicitous in some cases, particularly when those same
entities are involved in suing, say, YouTube/Google (as in the
ongoing Viacom saga).
The author's major concern appears to be the seemingly "chaotic,"
"moving target" nature of what is or isn't permissible to post on
YouTube. Will a given clip with a Content ID match be banned
worldwide? Only in some countries? Only the music/audio track
banned? Left up but monetized with ads? And will any of these status
elements suddenly change over time?
This certainly appears rather chaotic, but this is a case where --
despite my personal preference for at least some degree of order over
chaos -- it can be argued that chaos may actually be a good thing!
Fair Use exceptions are complicated creatures. Outside the realm of
fair use, however defined in any given case, the absolute control over
copyrighted works resides with the intellectual property owner of that
material. With the White House promising a new IP-friendly
legislative "anti-piracy" thrust, this area is likely to become even
more contentious shortly, perhaps especially for sites that specialize
in sharing of user uploaded materials.
It is the wide range of options available to copyright/IP owners on
YouTube -- the same options that seem to create a chaotic experience
for some uploaders of copyrighted clips -- that allows many of those
clips to stay online in the first place!
Without that range of options, owners of these materials would be far
more likely just to demand total takedowns in virtually every case.
(Counterargument: Demanding takedowns across the board from *all*
independent uploaders might more easily reveal which uploaders, if
any, were "fake viral" uploaders of that material, actually affiliated
with the IP owners -- they'd be the ones whose seemingly independent
uploads remained online after an otherwise complete purge.)
This all seems to be a situation where you don't *really* want to ask
for clearly defined rules -- 'cause you probably wouldn't
particularly enjoy how those rules would turn out.
So perhaps in this matter for now, the appropriate cheer might
actually be: "Hail Chaos!"
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Google Buzz: http://bit.ly/lauren-buzz
Quora: http://www.quora.com/Lauren-Weinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com