end of copyrights?
it's a sad state of affairs when a restaurateur in oregon is being fined by ASCAP while google is allowed to stream videos of copyrighted video on youtube (with out the expressed written consent of major league baseball, i might ad.)
it seems the club owner has nightly live music and the bands play an occasional cover.
on a more businesslike note, Viacom just sent a seize and desist letter re: copyrighted material to the purveyors of goodness over at google. so they are anxiously removing all NBC/Uni clips before they take control. of note: all daily show and colbert report segments (ny times article.) which makes one wonder about the power of youtube diminishing since it is predicated on drawing people in with one clip and then having viewers stick around to watch another, boosting advertisement views with each new clip.
the only reason i use it is watch copyrighted material that previously aired. yeah it's funny to watch the star wars kid, but it's not gonna get me in the door. or it will only once a month as opposed to once a day. idiotic acts only go so far. (and this may nullify my previous post on identity in public record. note the removed clip.but i doubt it as new sites will blossom in it's wake.)
but i'm willing to bet that if these letters continue- which they certainly will- and all copyrighted material is purged, not only will youtube hits decline, but also viewership on these popular shows. the clips act as a free commercial. they create buzz and interest. not to mention most can be found on comedycentral.com. so i suppose the real problem here is not the infringement on copyright, but the infringement on controlling who has access to the content. and that's the future of the web, not who has what, but who has access to what.
next up: i predict a youtube premium service wherein you can view copyrighted video. (access of evil? et tu google?)
it seems the club owner has nightly live music and the bands play an occasional cover.
that's insane.Now [ASCAP and affiliated publishers are] suing Dorr for copyright infringement - and they're seeking payment of between $750 and $30,000 for each song, along with attorney fees.
"It's basically going to bankrupt me and put me out of business," Dorr said this morning. "I can't afford the lawyer and the fees. It's going to close me down."
on a more businesslike note, Viacom just sent a seize and desist letter re: copyrighted material to the purveyors of goodness over at google. so they are anxiously removing all NBC/Uni clips before they take control. of note: all daily show and colbert report segments (ny times article.) which makes one wonder about the power of youtube diminishing since it is predicated on drawing people in with one clip and then having viewers stick around to watch another, boosting advertisement views with each new clip.
the only reason i use it is watch copyrighted material that previously aired. yeah it's funny to watch the star wars kid, but it's not gonna get me in the door. or it will only once a month as opposed to once a day. idiotic acts only go so far. (and this may nullify my previous post on identity in public record. note the removed clip.but i doubt it as new sites will blossom in it's wake.)
but i'm willing to bet that if these letters continue- which they certainly will- and all copyrighted material is purged, not only will youtube hits decline, but also viewership on these popular shows. the clips act as a free commercial. they create buzz and interest. not to mention most can be found on comedycentral.com. so i suppose the real problem here is not the infringement on copyright, but the infringement on controlling who has access to the content. and that's the future of the web, not who has what, but who has access to what.
next up: i predict a youtube premium service wherein you can view copyrighted video. (access of evil? et tu google?)
posted by citizen andrew at 2:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home