Pages

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Is Youtube.com killing its openness? Youtube users do not like corporate content flooding the website.

Image representing YouTube as depicted in Crun...Image via CrunchBase
I was recently surveying user comments on Youtube.com about productions, show inventories, videos by famous singers and music label promotion activities.

The situation about how users produce and access content on Youtube.com does seem a bit overwhelming especially when everyone across the globe is realizing both the fame and monetary benefits of using Youtube.com today while at the same time using the video sharing platform as a means to get heard, get the message out, archive and curate audio and video productions or simply remix public domain content. Everyone uses Youtube.com differently and perceive it differently as I found a couple of very interesting  comment posts being made by the usual users of the video sharing website and how happy they were with it but I also discovered how users were also using the website to produce some really neat stuff..

Just a few basics for the heck of it. YouTube, a video-sharing website on which users can upload, share, and view videos, was originally created by three former PayPal employees in February 2005 (source:wikipedia). Youtube.com became very famous as a peer-2-peer personal video and audio sharing website before being bought by Google.com. As Google.com modified the website including the way people uploaded content and copyright protections, it continued to host videos from both the general Internet user audience as well as video sharing by corporate companies but with certain terms including removing audio of videos that were using someone else's intellectual property like audio or images etc.

Also a bit about copyrights and ipr protection. When a user attempts to upload a video to Youtube.com, they are shown a screen that says, "Do not upload any TV shows, music videos, music concerts or advertisements without permission, unless they consist entirely of content that you created yourself." to ensure reduction in copyright and IPR violations by users. Despite this, Youtube.com faced various lawsuits by companies and as a counter measure to such violations, it introduced a Video ID system that checks uploaded videos against a database of copyrighted content with the aim of reducing violations but this did not stop courts from ruling Youtube.com to handover data detailing the viewing habits of every user who has watched videos on the site. Thus Youtube had to reveal all user private data and when the Electronic Frontier Foundation protested to this, the court ruled out the protest as speculative. More criticism can be read here on a dedicated page at Wikipedia.

The following Youtube.com channel for singer Katy Perry by VEVO (KatyPerryVEVO Channel) shows such a distrust level by users here. The video titled "Katy Perry - Teenage Dream (Remix)." The video carries the following copyright notice:

"KatyPerryVEVO | 27 October 2010 | 4,845 likes, 887 dislikes
Music video by Katy Perry performing Teenage Dream. (P) (C) 2010 Capitol Records, LLC. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is a violation of applicable laws. Manufactured by Capitol Records, LLC, 1750 North Vine Street, Hollywood, CA 90028."

As you scroll further down after the video portion, the following comments are raising concerns by the users of Youtube.com:

"Dear Vevo, Let me start by sayin get your corporate azzes off youtube! Ever since these big companies started paying off youtube so they could post their friggin videos we can't post ours. We are flagged for infringement evry time we include a song we like in our videos. This is YOUtube, the place where we can post OUR videos. If we wanted to listen to music from you wed go to your damn website.To people who want greedy corporates gone thumbs up and copy this on Vevo vids.thx
robertdubai1 1 day ago 68  


Why is everybody copying the same saying?


Dear Vevo, Let me start by sayin get your corporate asses off youtube! Ever since these big companies started paying off youtube so they could post their friggin videos we cant post ours. We are flagged for infringement evry time we include a song we like in our vids.This is YOUtube, the place where we can post OUR videos. If we wanted to listen to music from you we'd go to your damn website.
Create your own!!!
AussieKatie12 18 hours ago 5 "


So what is really happening here? The usual Youtube.com user called a non-partner is allowed to upload with a limit of 15 minute content durations according to the concept of 15 Minutes of Fame. Partners on the other hand are allowed to upload content as long as they want as shown here for Katy Parry's Making of Firework song. Many companies have now started releasing their content for global viewers using Youtube.com like this example here by The A.V. Club that has uploaded its entire video inventory.

On the contrary, Youtube.com also shows how to create content on short time scale as shown here in the "Creating a Hit: 8 Hour Challenge" also featured on Youtube Trends here. These two guys tried to make a Viral Video in 8 hours. I found this activity very interesting because the two guys also share thei concern that what it takes to produce a professional song and how what they did was not just exactly that. Why did they do it in the first place? Well I found the following reason the Viral Video's website here:


"Anyone else think that ‘pop’ music is just corny electronic beats with cheesy, meaningless lyrics? So do these two musicians. To prove that 90% of popular music on the radio is just pure garbage, they decide to make a pop song as fast as they can. In just eight hours, they create a pop Kesha-style song from scratch complete with original lyrics and beat. It sounds like it belongs on the radio. They are successful. The song starts at 6:00."

So far they have not done great in terms of viewership of their attempt on Youtube.com because they only received around 126,410 pages as of 22nd January 2011 ;o) Maybe my post will help them a bit :o).

So what was the conclusion of this activity so far? I am still trying to build up my perspective about this issue as to why users of a website that is owned by Google.com expect it to be open and liberal to remixed content made from copyrighted material. On one hand they hate it and on the other hand they still consume it. They produce content and attempt their 15 minutes to fame opportunity and on the other hand they complain as well. The partner option is available to everyone by Youtube.com but I really don't have an idea of how to get that facility but I don't need it either. One thing is for sure, I do not want any of my personal data to be accessed by anyone without my consent!


No comments:

Post a Comment

Kindly leave your comments here but the author reserves the right to include or exclude comments where deemed necessary.