Click To Subscribe
Get By EmailNo Viacom Videos For YouTube
So Viacom is demanding YouTube take down all of its copyrighted content (and they say they’re doing it… although, many videos are still there). This was surely coming for a while now (and reader Dave notes this isn’t the first time a request from Viacom was received). But I find it a little odd that Google hasn’t figured out a way to parse the commercial content from the user-created stuff. I mean, all their users can tell the difference.
Perhaps they were hoping to come up with some advertising-monetization strategy to sell to the copyright holders before they got pissed. I’m still hoping for something more imaginative than pre-roll ads, which I find really annoying (how about a still image before the video loads?).
Perhaps they were waiting until Google earnings were announced, so if they had to pay big, old media ka-billions, it wouldn’t hurt so bad this time around?
Meanwhile, Steve Jobs and his iTunes are plowing ahead with large download numbers for Disney movies. Show me the money? It’s right there, Viacom.
While I’m a little miffed I may not be able to search for John Stewart or Colbert Green Screen stuff on YouTube and watch it for free anymore, I can understand why infringing content must be removed. My only request is that more content be put on iTunes pronto (the Daily Show is), so I can at least have the option to get it in some legal fashion without having to resort to BitTorrent. I just want to be able to get videos on my computer in a format I can manage, without stupid ads. I’ll pay a small fee up front to not have ads in videos. I’m ready.
Another wrinkle is in the Google Adsense terms, there’s a clause about not displaying Google ads aside copyrighted material: Does this include embedded YouTube videos that are obviously copyrighted? Since YouTube is still hosting them, is Google the copyright violator, or is the website embedding the video that’s hosted on YouTube? Seems pretty hypocritical, to me.
Additional Reading: Business 2.0 Beta, Jeff Jarvis, TechCrunch, Conversion Rater
Categories: General, Google, Technology :: Tags: ::
Trackback URL
Front Page
Previous Post: Interesting: Technorati’s WTF
Next Post: Movie Notes: GoldenEye
Related Posts: Viacom Sues Google And YouTube for $1B :: You Tube For Sale: Netscape 2.0? :: Google Plus YouTube: Search For Videos :: YouTube Adds Ads To Videos ::
Make sure to read the comments on that post before drawing your conclusions. -
This isn’t the first time viacom stuff has come down. They had all the comedy stuff removed about half a year ago only to change their minds and allow it back up.
I don’t think there’s anything odd about not parsing the commercial stuff from the user stuff. It’s not that they can’t do it…it’s more likely that they’re loathe to do it. The commercial stuff, to a large extent, drove youtube’s early adoption and continues to create meaningful traffic for them. They’re still holding off for as long as they can (imho). Other nascent sites are equally lax about these issues b/c they know that while it’s questionable, it’s also an early growth driver.
There are technologies on the way though. One early stage company, attributor.com, has gotten a lot of mainstream press (WSJ write up too). It’s product? They come up with a unique digital footprint for copyrighted material and try to track down unauthorized content o the web. They are supposedly testing with some large companies (a friend of mine is a founder). Anyway, a business opportunity for sure. Not sure how well it will work, but it highlights a big problem on the web.
And you’re right. Pre-roll ads SUCK. I’m not going to watch a 1 minute amateur clip of questionable quality if I have to go through a 15-second preroll spot. But I probably would for an established big media franchise if they were giving me a full episode of one of their shows.
There are some folks doing the “still” ad before the video loads. But it’s still effectively a preroll (an advertiser is going to want assurances that the ad will be seen, so you can expect the “still” to “play” for 5-10 seconds before the video starts.
But look at it from the advertiser’s perspective for a moment (even if it causes you to shudder), they aren’t gonna want the static image. At the very least they’ll want some fancy interactive flash thinger (if not outright video).
It’s an interesting topic worth getting even more deeply into, but I must run out for a bit! Thanks for the blog post.
Thanks for commenting …
This another one of my totally off the wall ideas, but if you paid me one cent per copyrighted YouTube video to tag as such, I’d do it.
With the still image, I was kind of thinking about either a Flash preloader (most the youtube videos take a while to load before they can be played) or a still image that the user clicks on to start the video. But that’s mostly because I’d prefer it over watching some ad for 5 - 10 seconds. You’re probably right about the advertiser wanting assurances about an ad being seen for 5 - 10 seconds - but that would be a huge turn off for watching videos on line, at least as far as I’m concerned.
I don’t think advertisers get that a lot of people despise ads and that’s actually part of the reason why illegal downloads, DVDs and iTunes are so popular: no freaking ads.
Ultimately it’s choice though. You say you’d watch a full TV episode if you had a pre roll ad, whereas I might opt for doing an iTunes download for a buck or two so I didn’t have to watch the ad. Either way, there’s a price to pay, and I’m generally willing to do it.
But more options need to exist to allow us users to consume the media how we want. Right now, the options still are too limited… which is why YouTube is so freaking popular in the first place.
Well, I’m really just all talk Jase cuz in an ideal world I want NO ads and FREE
(oh wait, would that be bittorrent?)
Anyway, when I was at Ziff all the sales/ads guys used to drool over the ads on videosite Heavy.com. Here’s an example:
http://www.heavy.com/video/6850?link_back=
Of course, heavy.com has (relatively) languished while less ad heavy sites like youtube soared. Coincidence? Maybe. I know heavy’s ads are a huge turnoff to me, but you can see why advertisers would get orgasmic about them.
I’m looking forward to the Netflix streaming videos thing. Since I’m already paying to rent the DVDs, it’s pretty much free.
Oh, and one more link about web users finding ads in videos annoying.