Hi Alex,
On 30/09/2007, at 2:58 AM, Alexander Limi wrote:
Have you tried raising these issues with them, especially now that
they are trying to court NGOs? I'm sure they are willing to listen.
Well who to raise it with exactly in order to get heard? Am happy to
be put in contact with the right people though as people have noted
there are broader structural issues related to the type of web YT et
al are seeking to build. That said an improvement here may well spurn
on other changes.
Let me know.
Cheers.
Andrew
If you don't get any sensible answers, I'm happy to help with
locating the right people (and take it to Larry and Sergey if
necessary). I agree that these are serious issues.
— Alexander
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:05:18 -0700, and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It doesn't however seem that youtube have relaxed their highly
dubious terms and conditions which basically allow them to do near
anything with your work.
http://www.youtube.com/t/terms
"by submitting User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant
YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable
and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare
derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in
connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its
successors' and affiliates') business, including without
limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the
YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media
formats and through any media channels."
I think this is incredibly problematic for any media producer,
particularly non-profits who are often putting up sensitive
materials (human rights violations say or indigenous issues). The
fact that CC licenses are also not available is also cause for
concern for those interested in marrying their principals with how
they license their work. I don't think giving away 300 digital
cameras (a drop in the ocean for YT) really cuts it myself
particularly given YT will basically get a stack of free content
they can then advertise next too, they'll make up the cost of
those cameras pretty quickly. Add to this the fact that YT make it
hard to download and remix work and only offer low-resolution
flash video and you still have a pretty standard 'broadcast' media
model.
In my opinion YT basically offer an audience, highly valuable, but
for me it's not enough. I think Plone people should be much more
interested in creating alternatives to YT that allow people to
control their content and gather money from advertising or
donations which YT doesn't currently allow (though apparently they
are moving to.) Basically that's some of the core reasons for
EngageMedia/Plumi <http:/plumi.org> which we've been working on
for a while now.
If you want to read more rants along this line you can check
http://www.engagemedia.org/Members/andrewl/news/freebeer/
Cheers.
Andrew
On 29/09/2007, at 4:51 AM, Alexander Limi wrote:
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:06:23 -0700, Alexander Limi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
YouTube have just opened up premium accounts to non profits too
though, there must be something in the air at google :-)
Yeah, there's a lot of great NGO activity here these days. :)
Nice, I just saw that they are giving away video cameras to the
first 300 NGOs that sign up — I wasn't aware of that:
http://www.youtube.com/nonprofits
--Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo
--
Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo
_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo
