Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Set To Filter Content
An anonymous reader writes "Computerworld reports that Google is racing to head off a media industry backlash over its video Web site YouTube and will soon offer antipiracy technologies to help all copyright holders thwart unauthorized video sharing. But YouTube has also said that the process of identifying copyrighted material is not automated and will require the cooperation of media company partners."
I'd rather imagine being the lucky guy that DOESN'T have to watch 100 Britney videos, every day, as his job.
So... they just produce "crap," but then people post it and many people watch and enjoy it. Or... it's not piracy if it's crap?
Ultimately they may be shooting themselves in the foot, but the fact is there are LOTS of shows and movies posted on youtube in their entirety. They're idiots if they start taking down short "best of" clips, but I don't think Youtube was ever envisioned as a place where you could go add the complete Boondock Saints to your playlist.
And more people will know that the industries are evil, will stop buying their product. Then they will claim it was 'piracy', when its their own damned fault for producing crap, and acting like total morons.
:shock:, will continue to bombard the public with their scare tactics (which so far, for the general public, have been successful).
And the media companies, which control media distribution
As I said before, YouTube will just become the Napster of video. Most people weren't all pissed off about the industry when they shut that down, they just moved to LimeWire, BitTorrent, allofmp3, and iTS.
I don't know about that; I'd think that'd be a pretty cushy job. Sort of like being paid to check porn to see if it should be censored. Of course, it might get a little futile flagging episode after episode of naruto, just to see them come back again.
Actually, unless they can implement some kind of effective computerized filtering, they're never going to stop uploads; they'd have to hire an small army. Of course, I don't really see what the big deal is anyway; nobody who was serious about a show would watch it in low resolution on youtube; they'd either buy it or use P2P. If I was them, I'd try to cut my losses and recoup as much ad revenue as I could; that stuff is getting views, but ads are about as much as anyone would be willing to "pay" for it.
I'm also surprised they haven't tried any viral marketing stunts; the medium would be perfect for stirring up interest in new shows. Hell, it already does, but they're too stuck in the past to take advantage of it. I mean, we all heard about the publicity for the leaked 24 episodes -- if they could do something like that on purpose, along with a coordinated marketing flood on the "traditional" media, they could clean up.
I'm ok with this. After all it's called "YouTube", not "TheirTube". People should be posting original works only. That was the point of YouTube in the first place.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Slashdot has less emo and vanity. Sure it's got ego, but that I can stand. Emo's piss me off because they don't know suffering, and vanity pisses me off because it's fleeting. Ego at least is humourous.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I have to agree that copyright holders need to have the rights over their content, whether or not it is on youtube.
Copyright holders can certainly help find content that should not be on youtube. But finding piracy of their works should not be a burden on them.
The responsibility really lies with the uploaders to obtain proper releases for works they are not fully in charge of.
On the flip side, copyright holders have to realize the marketing potential of such media as youtube. From what I have seen, the video is either downgraded in its capture and/or the connection speed, so its not like you are getting purchase quality, though audio is not so bad.
I've seen numerious videos where credit is given and even where to get purchase quality.
But as a marketing tool, the work is findable in the search engine with taging.
I'd hate to see alot of the content vanish. but there is alot of duplication too.
Perhaps what is needed is some assurance from youtube that the quality will always be under what you can purchase, unless there is some formal release is on hand.
in the mean time, and I probably shouldn't do this as slashdotting a resource won't help me use it, but there is a firefox plugin for capturing such video to your local hard drive, but it goes thru another url to do so and sometimes its overloaded. Get your favorite videos that may vanish, while you can.
Not sure which definition of "free" you're working off this morning, but you are expected to watch the advertisements of the sponsors who paid for those "free" programmes in exchange for watching them. The industry has been very clear on this point: if you don't watch the ads, you are stealing.
If you are required to do anything in exchange for watching the programme, it isn't "free."
I don't care why you're posting AC