Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Federal Officials and YouTube Nearing a Deal

Posted by samzenpus on from the watching-the-watchers dept.

GovTechGuy writes "The federal government is on the verge of reaching an agreement with YouTube that would allow agencies to make official use of the popular video-sharing service. A coalition of federal agencies led by the General Service Administration's Office of Citizen Services has been negotiating with Google, YouTube's parent company, since summer 2008 on new terms that would allow agencies to establish their own channels on the site. Agencies have not been [allowed] to post videos to YouTube (although many already have) because under the current terms of service, people who post content are subject to their state's libel laws. Federal agencies must adhere to federal law. On Tuesday, government officials said the negotiations were 'very close' to being completed."

10 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Oh joy by rockNme2349 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wait, you mean it will be like C-Span, but whenever i want? I don't know if youtube has the bandwidth.

    --
    Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
    1. Re:Oh joy by rockNme2349 · · Score: 2, Funny

      the good bits.

      Think about what you just said.... Let it sink in.... Apology accepted.

      --
      Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
  2. I'm surprised they just didn't post from Cuba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The United States could just have its government employees post videos from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Solves the having to adhere to State's laws moot. And solves the problem of having to adhere to Federal law to boot.

  3. Not Engrish by fm6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Agencies have not been able to post videos to YouTube (although many already have) because, under the current terms of service, people who post content is subject to their state's liable laws.

    I notice this story has already been tagged "Engrish". But the submitter's issue is not so much poor ESL (I think he might even be a native speaker!) as poor self expression. They can't but they already have? What do the "liable laws" have to do with this?

    You know, since the editors never do any actual editing, maybe it's time to call them something else.

    1. Re:Not Engrish by Ian+Alexander · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know, since the editors never do any actual editing, maybe it's time to call them something else.

      I already do. However, it's not polite so I won't repeat it here. ;)

    2. Re:Not Engrish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You know, since the editors never do any actual editing, maybe it's time to call them something else.

      Enablers?

  4. Re:Be ready for Microsoft's complaint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Microsoft will probably ask Youtube to switch over to silverlight, just to make it fair and all.

  5. Re:Comments/Ratings policy, propaganda by ForrestFire439 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah right. It's vital to the well-being of our democracy that youtube viewers can barrage every video with "u suck cock lol" and "dude like pot iz ttly awesome. 420 MAN!"

    --
    "Bread and Circuses is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure." --Robert Heinlien
  6. Re:Be ready for Microsoft's complaint by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Funny

    And I will support Microsoft in its complaint if it ever materializes. Why should my tax dollars be used to purposefully enrich a private corporation?

    In case you haven't noticed - the government buys goods and services from private corporations on a daily basis.

  7. Re:In bed with Google by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, Funny

    If the comments are anything like what is currently on YouTube, I very much hope they nuke those comments from orbit.