Now the companies themselves will put the clips on the site or will not mind if fans put the clips there.
In the one hand they will share Google's add revenue (as Google has already pointed as part of their startegy), on the other hand they would get free advertising for the show.
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
So none of those. And many more will follow for sure, it is clear where the action is and oter companies would be stupid not to want a piece of the action (either as content providers, let Google do the advertisment and collectin pof revenue, or as competitors doing the same, which would be foolish to the extreme).
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
So they are covering their bases.
It will not be long before any who is who company in the bussiness of making videos and films will have some kind of agreement with Google, any other company feeling victimized will have to go through normal proceedings to remove material from the site before even contemplating getting any damages (you can't go from finding copyrighted material to be awarded damages, you have to allow for the copyright infringment to be remediated, as long as Google is diligent on this regard they will never be in serious trouble).
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group"
So the copyright aspect is frankly a moot point, Google is also promising to share the proceeds of any future revenue with video owners, that will fence off most other challenges.
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
The dinosaurs are giving way. THe original poster was right, and you are, well, you.
And society has decided that "all black people deserve to die and should be killed" is a bad idea.
Not even that, it is such a bad idea that whoever utters it with the intent to causing harm can be brought to court and be punished.
There is a point where crackpots have to be brought to explain themselves, specially if they have the potential to become dangerous.
YOu are missing the point regarding this legislation. The ideas are not being banned. Their use as a hate tool are, you are allowed to postulate certain things, but the moment your are intent into harming people by inciting others to do so, you become a suspected criminal.
Nobody would bat an eyelid if you want to ban a Black festivity. It would be deemed inconsiderate and ill adviced, but it would never be considered inciting to hate.
As for the others, they are policies, not incitmenets to hate. I think you got so thoroughly confussed there that you lost completely the thread of what you wanted to say...
This idiot was refering to a very specific group of people in a kind of behaviour that society, by means of its elected representatives, finds so reprehensible and abhorrent that penalties should be imposed.
Many US people keep this liberal rosy "hey speech freedom is absolute". Typical black and white view of life. Well, here in real life, where most of Europe is, the shades of gray are many and some lines have to be drawn in the sands of history.
By not keeping an eye on people like you know who and his ilk, Europe allowed itself to be trhown into mayhem almost 70 years ago.
If the instigators of hate would have been dealt with in the early stages of their delussional carrers, we may have avoided several years of the most unimaginable carnage.
Think about it the next time you want to defend the absolute rights of a bigot (which btw, still can spaek his dreadful ideas as long as he does not threaten specific people or groups of people, because in spite of what you think, most countries in Europe recognize that these people should be heard, but will not tolerate when they cross certain limits of common human decency).
Considering that Mrs Walter has forgiven the killers of his soon (google it, don't be lazy) and that she has beheaved in the most gracious and impecable manner, I will assign to USianess and distance your misguided attemt to compare both unfortunate cases.
Mrs Walter has behaved herself in the same admirable fashion as the Amish community you are alluding. One thing is to be nice, but another very different would be to be stupid.
The hate speech that is commonly forbidden in sensible countries is the one that incites in no uncertain terms to harm other identifiable, immediately close, group of people.
It is perfectly legal in the UK to form a racist party (like the BNP, google it and have fun) or for Islamists to express their derided views about global jihad.
Those are ideas, some more distateful than others, but since they are not targeting specific groups of people in the UK, they can speak them until the end of times.
When the game changes is when they say "lets kill x" or "lets beat Z". In the moment they name specific aims they become subject of criminal investigation. And that IMHO is a good thing.
Your point seems to be "the flames are burning, lets throw some more petrol to extinguish them" which frankly makes no sense to me.
I will not even try to google for Derek Jeters and Peyton Mannings. I have no idea who they are and I do not wish to know.
But I can say with confidence that most people in the US (and South Korea) will know nothing about Andy Flintoff, Jonah Lomu, Manuel Laureano Rodríguez Sánchez.
Each country have different sets of sporting heroes, I don't see why the activities that capture the imagination of people in one place should be the same in other places.
Bar football and the name Pele, I think there are no universal personalities in the world of sport.
How many more bits of your constitution, laws, international treaties, principles and moral guidelines do you need eviscerated before you stop supporting this individual?
We praise ourselves of being very fluffy clever, nevertheless we haven't squared a simple solution to the authentication problem.
Or maybe there are no simple solutions, but people that are not familiar or comforatable with IT should not be denigrated for solutions that are clearly inadequate, difficult, or both.
I have been in places like Vietnam, Namibia, the Philippines and Indonesia (Suharto era) as well as many other more potable places. I have acquantices that have actually been to Burma (may their companies be shamed forevever).
I can confidently say that US immigration is unpolite, aggressive and downright racist.
As for security, it is similar to Europe now, but the US was the one that upgraded.
I remeber my first travel to the US and watched in horror in the way back as they allowed pretty much anybody and his dog to bid farewell to their friends and relatives in the boarding gates. This was in Houston, not in a small regional airport.... This was at a a time when in Mexico you would not be allowed into the plane with small items that could be dangerous (screwdrivers for example).
The alternative universe in which politicians move defies normal logic.
The only formal difference is that in Europe you have higer protection in regards how your personal data is used, but I am sure that if you don't allow that data to be used you will not fly.
Slashdot Mirror
Now the companies themselves will put the clips on the site or will not mind if fans put the clips there.
In the one hand they will share Google's add revenue (as Google has already pointed as part of their startegy), on the other hand they would get free advertising for the show.
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
So none of those. And many more will follow for sure, it is clear where the action is and oter companies would be stupid not to want a piece of the action (either as content providers, let Google do the advertisment and collectin pof revenue, or as competitors doing the same, which would be foolish to the extreme).
And sued for exactly what btw?
Those two come to my mind now. They were bought.
You are assumoing too much and thinking too little.
From one of many sources today:
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
So they are covering their bases.
It will not be long before any who is who company in the bussiness of making videos and films will have some kind of agreement with Google, any other company feeling victimized will have to go through normal proceedings to remove material from the site before even contemplating getting any damages (you can't go from finding copyrighted material to be awarded damages, you have to allow for the copyright infringment to be remediated, as long as Google is diligent on this regard they will never be in serious trouble).
Quoting from one of many sources this morning:
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group"
So the copyright aspect is frankly a moot point, Google is also promising to share the proceeds of any future revenue with video owners, that will fence off most other challenges.
"As its negotiations with Google neared a conclusion, YouTube announced partnerships with Universal Music Group, CBS Corporation and Sony BMG Music Entertainment.
Those alliances followed a similar arrangement announced last month with Warner Music Group. "
The dinosaurs are giving way. THe original poster was right, and you are, well, you.
... but I very much doubt that previous version of explorer had Google as the starting point.
Being the default search engine means squat if there is one better and less intrusive out there.
And society has decided that "all black people deserve to die and should be killed" is a bad idea.
Not even that, it is such a bad idea that whoever utters it with the intent to causing harm can be brought to court and be punished.
There is a point where crackpots have to be brought to explain themselves, specially if they have the potential to become dangerous.
YOu are missing the point regarding this legislation. The ideas are not being banned. Their use as a hate tool are, you are allowed to postulate certain things, but the moment your are intent into harming people by inciting others to do so, you become a suspected criminal.
Nobody would bat an eyelid if you want to ban a Black festivity. It would be deemed inconsiderate and ill adviced, but it would never be considered inciting to hate.
As for the others, they are policies, not incitmenets to hate. I think you got so thoroughly confussed there that you lost completely the thread of what you wanted to say...
New legislation was passed recently to account for such comments.
In recent demonstrations (agains the Danish cartoons or the Pope) people have got out of line and they have been questioned by police.
If you want to make a point first inform yourself first (unless you are trolling, in which case, by our guest).
This idiot was refering to a very specific group of people in a kind of behaviour that society, by means of its elected representatives, finds so reprehensible and abhorrent that penalties should be imposed.
Many US people keep this liberal rosy "hey speech freedom is absolute". Typical black and white view of life. Well, here in real life, where most of Europe is, the shades of gray are many and some lines have to be drawn in the sands of history.
By not keeping an eye on people like you know who and his ilk, Europe allowed itself to be trhown into mayhem almost 70 years ago.
If the instigators of hate would have been dealt with in the early stages of their delussional carrers, we may have avoided several years of the most unimaginable carnage.
Think about it the next time you want to defend the absolute rights of a bigot (which btw, still can spaek his dreadful ideas as long as he does not threaten specific people or groups of people, because in spite of what you think, most countries in Europe recognize that these people should be heard, but will not tolerate when they cross certain limits of common human decency).
Considering that Mrs Walter has forgiven the killers of his soon (google it, don't be lazy) and that she has beheaved in the most gracious and impecable manner, I will assign to USianess and distance your misguided attemt to compare both unfortunate cases.
Mrs Walter has behaved herself in the same admirable fashion as the Amish community you are alluding. One thing is to be nice, but another very different would be to be stupid.
The hate speech that is commonly forbidden in sensible countries is the one that incites in no uncertain terms to harm other identifiable, immediately close, group of people.
It is perfectly legal in the UK to form a racist party (like the BNP, google it and have fun) or for Islamists to express their derided views about global jihad.
Those are ideas, some more distateful than others, but since they are not targeting specific groups of people in the UK, they can speak them until the end of times.
When the game changes is when they say "lets kill x" or "lets beat Z". In the moment they name specific aims they become subject of criminal investigation. And that IMHO is a good thing.
Your point seems to be "the flames are burning, lets throw some more petrol to extinguish them" which frankly makes no sense to me.
Even in a system so corrupted as the US's the people in the high echelons of power have a trackable history to when they were small fish.
At least is an abuse of speech, at wosrt is harrasment.
In any case, it should be punished.
And boy, did it work...
I will not even try to google for Derek Jeters and Peyton Mannings. I have no idea who they are and I do not wish to know.
But I can say with confidence that most people in the US (and South Korea) will know nothing about Andy Flintoff, Jonah Lomu, Manuel Laureano Rodríguez Sánchez.
Each country have different sets of sporting heroes, I don't see why the activities that capture the imagination of people in one place should be the same in other places.
Bar football and the name Pele, I think there are no universal personalities in the world of sport.
I did not exist 150 years ago, it may not exist in 100 more.
How many more bits of your constitution, laws, international treaties, principles and moral guidelines do you need eviscerated before you stop supporting this individual?
But not Linux, because then they would have to give back to the community.
Fedorec Core 4, Ubuntu 6.
We praise ourselves of being very fluffy clever, nevertheless we haven't squared a simple solution to the authentication problem.
Or maybe there are no simple solutions, but people that are not familiar or comforatable with IT should not be denigrated for solutions that are clearly inadequate, difficult, or both.
I have been in places like Vietnam, Namibia, the Philippines and Indonesia (Suharto era) as well as many other more potable places. I have acquantices that have actually been to Burma (may their companies be shamed forevever).
I can confidently say that US immigration is unpolite, aggressive and downright racist.
As for security, it is similar to Europe now, but the US was the one that upgraded.
I remeber my first travel to the US and watched in horror in the way back as they allowed pretty much anybody and his dog to bid farewell to their friends and relatives in the boarding gates. This was in Houston, not in a small regional airport.... This was at a a time when in Mexico you would not be allowed into the plane with small items that could be dangerous (screwdrivers for example).
I refuse to be submitted to the insulting handling of US immigration. Not even Vietnam immigration people were as nasty as US immigration are.
I could save money making stop overs in the US but I don't, I prefer to pay a bit more but to be treated with some respect and dignity.
When you are working in big projects you flight often to the same place, and often you have to miss flights due to last minute plans.
Profiling does not work. It is hand weaving for the peanut gallery....
The alternative universe in which politicians move defies normal logic.
The only formal difference is that in Europe you have higer protection in regards how your personal data is used, but I am sure that if you don't allow that data to be used you will not fly.