The ownership society catches up with YouTube ... for now

YouTube

YouTube is 30,000 files smaller:

The Japan Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers, found 29,549 video clips such as television shows, music videos and movies posted on YouTube's site without permission, an official from the group, Fumiyuki Asakura, said Friday.

The San Mateo, Calif.-based company quickly complied with the request to remove the copyright materials, made on behalf of 23 Japanese TV stations and entertainment companies, Asakura said.

Most videos posted on YouTube are homemade, but the site also features scores of copyright material posted by individual users. YouTube's policy is to remove such clips after it receives complaints, though some have suggested the startup eventually could be sued, especially with deep-pocketed Google Inc. about to buy it for $1.65 billion in stock.

This is almost inevitable. The media industry is built upon control over distribution, and 'net outlets like YouTube blast their oligopoly back into the 20th century. They are trying to hang on by using DRM and sniffer technology:

The company agreed to deploy an audio-signature technology that can spot a low-quality copy of a licensed clip. YouTube would have to substitute an approved version or remove the material automatically.

But the writing is on the wall: There is no room for the controlling middle man in the new economy. Content creators, producers, writers, photographers, videographers, filmmakers will be taking their work more directly to their audiences. In the end, while things will inevitably shift around, my guess is that the new economy will be better for the creators.

It's the "owners" who don't create, just speculate, that will lose out. They require big jackpot payoffs, and the market is shifting to the long tail.

About the author
User picture

Laura Scott is a web designer and developer.

Comments

Don't they know that when a

Don't they know that when a clip goes onto something like You-Tube, it is a big draw and directs viewers to the station?

Remember when Steven Spielberg decided that the film "E.T." was going to be for the ages and his legal team unflinchingly hunted down every mis-use of the images? In one example, there was a medical ad at the time of ET showing a sensor used in monitoring pediatric patients. It relied on using a red light that touched the baby's finger. Rather than fight the lawyers, the firm dropped the ad.

Maybe keeping E.T. from getting ripped off did not kill E.T. Maybe E.T. just didn't wear well, but sometimes the audience does more marketing for a product that a whole team of million dollar ad firms and and high cost campaigns.

But if that every got out, they'd lose their jobs and so where would they be then?