[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, rudy.jahchan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a human interaction of breaking contract and at some point needs to be dealt as such. -- Enric Everyone, listen to Enric. He is wise and terrible, like a god. I shall raise a holy army in his name to smite those of you who don't Gee look at the time ... off to bed. Sleep well my horned saint. - et
Re: [videoblogging] www.jeroenwijering.com
well in the context of the flash players he builds, both xml specs are used specifically for playlists. On 1/3/07, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/3/07, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.com wrote: maybe someone linked to your feed in the forums for testing xspf/rss playlists. For what it's worth, I object to the phrase xspf/rss playlists. RSS is a feed, XSPF is a playlist. They have different strengths, weaknesses, architectures, and, most of all, purposes. Jeroen made up this wording to describe the functionality of his player and it seems to have stuck, despite the fact that it creates confusion. -Lucas -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Den 04.01.2007 kl. 08:07 skrev rudy.jahchan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There is no difference. Copyright is what enables licensing. And since they're linking rather than re-hosting, there is no copyright issue. Incorrect. Copyright states who owns and has the right to make decisions on a piece of work. A license is the agreement you make to say who can send it out. We have the standard agreement for all our content out there in CC format. Still: Same difference. Your copyrights lock what you create down. When you license something, you open it up again by removing some or all of your copyrights. Your license works because it's an extension of or created under copyright laws. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/
[videoblogging] Re: Heavy.com, the NYC-based broadband video firm, has received $12.
I wrote a fairly long blog entry about this on my blog, http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2117 Heavy.com and the dangers of social network investing I'm forwarding this on to some investors that I know. For those of you who have had your work improperly placed on heavy.com, can any of you provide me with specific links? Do any of you have other comments about my blog entry, or my dealing with the investors? Aldon
[videoblogging] Re: Heavy.com, the NYC-based broadband video firm, has received $12.
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Aldon Hynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote a fairly long blog entry about this on my blog, http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2117 Heavy.com and the dangers of social network investing I'm forwarding this on to some investors that I know. For those of you who have had your work improperly placed on heavy.com, can any of you provide me with specific links? Since the links are very long(they include the video information), here some of them in tinyurl format: http://tinyurl.com/vfqko http://tinyurl.com/y3zj65 http://tinyurl.com/y8e2xr http://tinyurl.com/y63ffc http://tinyurl.com/yxqd66 http://tinyurl.com/yymj27 http://tinyurl.com/un93j http://tinyurl.com/y5ltxs http://tinyurl.com/y76v25 http://tinyurl.com/y37l3h http://tinyurl.com/y7lhgm -- Enric Do any of you have other comments about my blog entry, or my dealing with the investors? Aldon
[videoblogging] Re: Heavy.com, the NYC-based broadband video firm, has received $12.
And an additional follow up: I went out to Polaris Venture Partners website and found the list of their partners. I sent an email to their three managing general partners, as well as to Bob Metcalfe who is a general partner there as well as a well know name in the internet. Here is what I sent: --- This morning, I wrote a blog entry entitled Heavy.com and the dangers of social network investing. http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2117 It discusses your recent investment in Heavy.com as well as issues surrounding Heavy.com's business practices and the response it is getting among videobloggers. I am wondering if any of you have any comments on my blog entry or the maelstrom that is brewing around heavy.com. Aldon Hynes http://www.orient-lodge.com --- I will be very interested to see what sort of responses they have to make. According to the Don't Go South article, Polaris has at least a 25% ownership of heavy.com Aldon
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
When I described Myheavy.com as privately help I got 'em mixed up with that other Maxim-esque site, Break.com. My bad.
Re: [videoblogging] upcoming Flash features of vPIP
thats averry cool player enric. how can i use that randy On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: www.jeroenwijering.com
Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... It's not from our use of the flash player. He has some new Flash player versions that can subscribe to RSS feeds, and he likes to demo them. Sounds right. I just used Interarchy to trace the connections made when you play a video off blip.tv. Based on that, I think I can confirm that the blip.tv player - which is based on Jeroen's code - doesn't connect to anything except blip.tv hosts. Angus
Re: [videoblogging] upcoming Flash features of vPIP
That looks awesome Enric! On 1/4/07, RANDY MANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thats averry cool player enric. how can i use that randy On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.com wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://thenameiwantedwastaken.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Sport's Governing Body Pulls the Plug
Hello guys, I thought I'd share with you the fact that golf's governing body (The Royal Ancient) has put pressure on The Carnoustie Golf Links and has had them remove the vlog of their preparations for The Open 2007. I was wondering if anyone else had had experience of this and if you thought we were likely to see more or less of this sort of PR 1.0 thing in the future? Best Regards, Gary -- Blog:http://www.garyshort.org Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: gary.short
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
i think practicality wins out here Lucas it appears that the divining job was not too tough for them as the videos I indicated to them are now removed. markus On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Lucas Gonze wrote: You refused to identify the vids, asking them to figure out for you what those were. If you identified them then you would be within the abilities granted per DMCA notice-and-takedown, but otherwise you go beyond. If they put a staffer on the job of divining what URLs are involved, they are opening the door to a new obligation. For example, imagine that Google gets: (a) a demand to not link to http://example.com/foo.mp3, which is an unauthorized host of a Foo Fighters recording. (b) a demand to not link to any infringing Foo Fighters recordings. If (b) is the law of the land, the scope of the DMCA will have been massively expanded. --- Markus Sandy http://feeds.feedburner.com/havemoneywillvlog http://feeds.feedburner.com/apperceptions http://feeds.feedburner.com/digitaldojo http://feeds.feedburner.com/spinflow [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Didn't our Republican led government just hamstring our ability to get together to form class action lawsuits? Or was that just for medicine? Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:15 PM, Enric wrote: Two words for that: class action ;) --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Casey McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree that we should blog about this, but I also feel they should not get the traffic... so perhaps we shouldn't link to them. I really wish we all had lawyers right now. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.dedman@ wrote: Forget posting messages to MyHeavy, post your messages where the investors will see them. John is right.everyone should blog about it. this is your power. this is also how we all can educate... we can also point to these blog posts in future incidents. anyone have an old Veoh post when they were re-uploading videos to their service? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
There is absolutely no reason not to blog about this whenever it happens. It's not about mobbing for sake of mobbing. This is a legit concern and it should be on the radar of any reputable service in this space. Sull is right. On the contrary, we SHOULD blog about this. First because this company should feel the pain (I'm evil), but more importantly because all the other companies can clearly see what's happening and learn the lesson. Peter [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version...
I don't want to be a broken record, and I really hate to admit that I might have tinfoil hats tucked away for easy access, but if I were interested in putting down citizen media, and I had billions of dollars at my disposal, I would create a legal black hole to put folks like Blip out of business. It seems to me that Mike, and all of us, have 2 choices here: fight a David v Goliath through legal channels, or ignore it and become assimilated into the corporate media machine. Neither one is very appealing to me. Anyone else have any thoughts about this? I want to know how these jokers got millions invested in them? (squares up tinfoil hat...) And furthermore... What would be better than for open media to be killed by some of their own: young, goatee'd, hip, etc? Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Casey McKinnon wrote: I agree that we should blog about this, but I also feel they should not get the traffic... so perhaps we shouldn't link to them. I really wish we all had lawyers right now. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forget posting messages to MyHeavy, post your messages where the investors will see them. John is right.everyone should blog about it. this is your power. this is also how we all can educate... we can also point to these blog posts in future incidents. anyone have an old Veoh post when they were re-uploading videos to their service? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I wrote them this: I've found out that you have reposted my videos, violating the license that is clearly shown in each video. Please take down these videos from your site immediately. Don't tell me they were uploaded by a member - they were not. I am contacting my laywers about this case. Peter On 1/4/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
They are modifying my video and releasing it under a different license for profit and they are not giving me attribution. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 4, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Enric wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze@ wrote: This is a link being fetched on the client side, not a copy on the server side, so it's not a copyright issue. I see what you mean. They're pulling to the FLV file from blip.tv and supimposing in flash they're own material on top. Regardless of the method, the presentation and action is breaking the CC non- commercial license. They are presenting through their flash player a video that they are not licensed to present. Their flash player is displaying frames of video without the rights to do that. Media (bytes) that they don't have a right to is being pulled through their player which resides on the client side. Firefox is licensed to present any material. Neither is Internet Explorer. The player doesn't need rights here. I think there's a clear difference between the building the CBS Jumbo-Tron is on and the CBS Jumbo-Tron. If the CBS Jumbo-Tron shows video without license then it is the right of the one being infringed to have that desist and request compensation. A custom flash player written by online video company MyHeavy.com that overlays their logo, display ads on top prior to rolling and such is clearly different to any observer and the consumer from a browser. We can discuss the technical differences through many messages. But this product is obvious to any consumer, technical or not, as a commercial presentation of a video. And even if it did, so what? You have zero chance of controlling the behavior of all the third parties who can author an FLV player in Flash, while you definitely have the ability to force them to respect your wishes using Referer headers. That puts the responsibility on the content creator to continually hunt down infringers and put them on notice. There's no incentive to stop future infringement. It's like spam filtering. You could insist that spammers stop if you yell STOP loud enough, and you could even put your theory into practice by yelling until you ran out of breath, but you wouldn't achieve anything. Installing a spam filter would be a better idea. MyHeavy (and Veoh before them) are not spammers. They don't move to a new server, zombie a computer and such to continue their work. They are companies or individuals that will act professionaly if incentivized. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
[snip] On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A custom flash player written by online video company MyHeavy.com that overlays their logo, display ads on top prior to rolling and such is clearly different to any observer and the consumer from a browser. Not to the web it isn't. Flash is just another user agent. We may expect clients to look like browsers, but that's just a misperception. Agreed. And even if it did, so what? You have zero chance of controlling the behavior of all the third parties who can author an FLV player in Flash, while you definitely have the ability to force them to respect your wishes using Referer headers. That puts the responsibility on the content creator to continually hunt down infringers and put them on notice. There's no incentive to stop future infringement. It puts the responsibility on the content host, yes, but that only has to be done once. (Unless you want to be picky about which third parties can link to you, of course, but even then it's a lot faster and more effective to have a rule for each blocked linker than to try to get them to rewrite their site for you. ) That's correct. The problem is that we do want to be picky. We want to allow people to use VPIP to play back videos hosted on blip, but we don't want to allow them to use the MyHeavy player on MyHeavy.com (unless it's the content creator themselves making that decision, in which case it's OK). Make sense? The issue here is that it's always case-by-case, and I challenge you to create rewrite rules that don't include a narrow whitelisting of things like VPIP (which don't have usable user-agent reporting anyway). [snip] MyHeavy (and Veoh before them) are not spammers. They don't move to a new server, zombie a computer and such to continue their work. They are companies or individuals that will act professionaly if incentivized. The instant you convince Veoh, here comes MyHeavy and hundreds of others. The best evidence that this is so is that this whole thing is a permathread among the videobloggers. You could work it out with each of them, which has been a total failure so far, or you could just fix the problem. Lucas, how do you want to fix the problem? I'm all ears on this issue. I'm ready to fix the problem. I'm just not sure that I see a clear technical solution.
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I just got off the phone with Heavy's CFO and followed up with an e-mail listing specific areas of infringement. I expect to hear from them in the next hour or so, and if I do not I will follow up with another phone call. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Watson Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:00 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses They are modifying my video and releasing it under a different license for profit and they are not giving me attribution. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 4, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Enric wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze@ wrote: This is a link being fetched on the client side, not a copy on the server side, so it's not a copyright issue. I see what you mean. They're pulling to the FLV file from blip.tv and supimposing in flash they're own material on top. Regardless of the method, the presentation and action is breaking the CC non- commercial license. They are presenting through their flash player a video that they are not licensed to present. Their flash player is displaying frames of video without the rights to do that. Media (bytes) that they don't have a right to is being pulled through their player which resides on the client side. Firefox is licensed to present any material. Neither is Internet Explorer. The player doesn't need rights here. I think there's a clear difference between the building the CBS Jumbo-Tron is on and the CBS Jumbo-Tron. If the CBS Jumbo-Tron shows video without license then it is the right of the one being infringed to have that desist and request compensation. A custom flash player written by online video company MyHeavy.com that overlays their logo, display ads on top prior to rolling and such is clearly different to any observer and the consumer from a browser. We can discuss the technical differences through many messages. But this product is obvious to any consumer, technical or not, as a commercial presentation of a video. And even if it did, so what? You have zero chance of controlling the behavior of all the third parties who can author an FLV player in Flash, while you definitely have the ability to force them to respect your wishes using Referer headers. That puts the responsibility on the content creator to continually hunt down infringers and put them on notice. There's no incentive to stop future infringement. It's like spam filtering. You could insist that spammers stop if you yell STOP loud enough, and you could even put your theory into practice by yelling until you ran out of breath, but you wouldn't achieve anything. Installing a spam filter would be a better idea. MyHeavy (and Veoh before them) are not spammers. They don't move to a new server, zombie a computer and such to continue their work. They are companies or individuals that will act professionaly if incentivized. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
[snip] okay...so they are just pulling in videos from feeds...and overlaying the watermark/videos on top... as Lucas says...yes, video hosting sites like Blip.tv can just redirect... and insert all Blip ads into the old URL... I can do this on a case-by-case basis.
Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version...
Seems to me that we are doing quite well raising some shit. Don't think that laywers is the only thing a funded company is afraid off. Users raising shit scares them even more. Peter On 1/4/07, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want to be a broken record, and I really hate to admit that I might have tinfoil hats tucked away for easy access, but if I were interested in putting down citizen media, and I had billions of dollars at my disposal, I would create a legal black hole to put folks like Blip out of business. It seems to me that Mike, and all of us, have 2 choices here: fight a David v Goliath through legal channels, or ignore it and become assimilated into the corporate media machine. Neither one is very appealing to me. Anyone else have any thoughts about this? I want to know how these jokers got millions invested in them? (squares up tinfoil hat...) And furthermore... What would be better than for open media to be killed by some of their own: young, goatee'd, hip, etc? Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Casey McKinnon wrote: I agree that we should blog about this, but I also feel they should not get the traffic... so perhaps we shouldn't link to them. I really wish we all had lawyers right now. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forget posting messages to MyHeavy, post your messages where the investors will see them. John is right.everyone should blog about it. this is your power. this is also how we all can educate... we can also point to these blog posts in future incidents. anyone have an old Veoh post when they were re-uploading videos to their service? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version...
It's a really big Internet, and Heavy is much more concerned with the 17 year old boy sitting in front of his computer at 11 PM than they are with you. How much influence do you have over that kid? -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Van Dijck Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:28 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version... Seems to me that we are doing quite well raising some shit. Don't think that laywers is the only thing a funded company is afraid off. Users raising shit scares them even more. Peter On 1/4/07, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want to be a broken record, and I really hate to admit that I might have tinfoil hats tucked away for easy access, but if I were interested in putting down citizen media, and I had billions of dollars at my disposal, I would create a legal black hole to put folks like Blip out of business. It seems to me that Mike, and all of us, have 2 choices here: fight a David v Goliath through legal channels, or ignore it and become assimilated into the corporate media machine. Neither one is very appealing to me. Anyone else have any thoughts about this? I want to know how these jokers got millions invested in them? (squares up tinfoil hat...) And furthermore... What would be better than for open media to be killed by some of their own: young, goatee'd, hip, etc? Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Casey McKinnon wrote: I agree that we should blog about this, but I also feel they should not get the traffic... so perhaps we shouldn't link to them. I really wish we all had lawyers right now. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forget posting messages to MyHeavy, post your messages where the investors will see them. John is right.everyone should blog about it. this is your power. this is also how we all can educate... we can also point to these blog posts in future incidents. anyone have an old Veoh post when they were re-uploading videos to their service? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
The Referer header is unreliable. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lucas Gonze Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:25 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses This is a link being fetched on the client side, not a copy on the server side, so it's not a copyright issue. Iff someone has a problem with something that they can easily fix, they should do the fix. Anything else is willful. What you want video aggregators to do will break the web. The web has a mechanism for doing what you want to do, which is the Referer header. If you use the existing mechanisms, you can achieve what you want and preserve the web at the same time. The alternative course that you are pursuing will not work and will destroy the web. Using Referer headers will work and will preserve the web. -Lucas On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If someone breaks a copyright whether individual or corporation and seeks to profit by it, then it is the right for the copyright holder to charge a value they want for their work. It is also a right to demand this not happen. Or to put on notice for a suit. The person whose material is being violated should not be considered guilty. -- Enric --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Their service is a Flash app which plays an arbitrary FLV file on any server. For example I can patch this URL of theirs for viewing Steve Garfield stuff on blip: http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/file/get/S tevegarfield-BehindTheScenesJohnEdwardsYouTubeAndTheCampaignWebsite426 .flvvideo_title=Behind%20the%20Scenes%3A...video_desc=video_author_ name=Blip%20TVvideo_author_url=http%3A//blip.tvvideo_thumb_url=http% 3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Stevegarfield-BehindTheScenesJohnEdwardsYouT ubeAndTheCampaignWebsite586.jpg To use this third party FLV instead: http://www.mediacollege.com/video-gallery/testclips/barsandtone.flv Giving this completely functional URL: http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http://www.mediacollege.com /video-gallery/testclips/barsandtone.flvvideo_title=Behind%20the%20Sc enes%3A...video_desc=video_author_name=Blip%20TVvideo_author_url=ht tp%3A//blip.tvvideo_thumb_url=http%3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Stevegar field-BehindTheScenesJohnEdwardsYouTubeAndTheCampaignWebsite586.jpg To make this problem go away 100% blip.tv just needs to do a rewrite rule to block myheavy.com. This will do the job without a crazy lynch mob asking to extend the DMCA to be even more onerous and, given the blip guys' chops, will take less than ten minutes. The sky is not falling. Really. Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re:Video iPod - keep dialogue open.
thanks for your nice words Bev! ... I'm assuming you get stuff to download and transfer? ... Richard On 1/4/07, Bev Sykes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard (Show) Hall has been very helpful to me. This is basically some wonderful information that he shared: I do everything manually - I manually update in iTunes, manually select files and select download, and then manually drag everything to my iPod, so that may make a difference. Plus, whenever it doesn't work for me to put them in iPod I always get an error message - something about these files won't work on this iPod, and you didn't say anything about an error message. Having said all that ... I right/control click on the file that won't work and select convert for iPod or something like that. It then starts converting, which takes a while and you can even see the conversion progress if you click on a little thing that starts swirling over on the left menu. Once it/they have converted, then it places the new files in the movies folder in iTunes, so you now have two copies of the file. This through me off at first because I thought it was the same file, but there is a new one in the movie folder and that one should work. BEV AGAIN: I'm gradually getting a handle on how this all works and enjoying it tremendously. If you're on the fence about buying, I'll give you a nudge in that direction! On 1/3/07, Gromik Tohoku [EMAIL PROTECTED]gromik_tohoku%40yahoo.com.au wrote: I am thinking of purchasing a video ipod, so your questions and answers might be of great benefits to the group, if you don't mind keep the conversation open. Thanks Nicolas Gromik Nicolas Tohoku University Sendai, Japan fax=81-22-7647 http://www.filmedworld.com/page.php?3 http://nag-productions.blip.tv/? http://sendai-city-tourism-tohoku-university.blip.tv/ Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -- Bev Sykes http://funnytheblog.blogspot.com http://funnytheworld.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://richardhhall.org http://richardshow.com http://inspiredhealing.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
thanks for the update Mike, and everyone else so far just one more example of why I love Blip and Mike Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just got off the phone with Heavy's CFO and followed up with an e- mail listing specific areas of infringement. I expect to hear from them in the next hour or so, and if I do not I will follow up with another phone call. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Watson Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:00 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses They are modifying my video and releasing it under a different license for profit and they are not giving me attribution. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 4, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Enric wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze@ wrote: On 1/3/07, Enric enric@ wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze@ wrote: This is a link being fetched on the client side, not a copy on the server side, so it's not a copyright issue. I see what you mean. They're pulling to the FLV file from blip.tv and supimposing in flash they're own material on top. Regardless of the method, the presentation and action is breaking the CC non- commercial license. They are presenting through their flash player a video that they are not licensed to present. Their flash player is displaying frames of video without the rights to do that. Media (bytes) that they don't have a right to is being pulled through their player which resides on the client side. Firefox is licensed to present any material. Neither is Internet Explorer. The player doesn't need rights here. I think there's a clear difference between the building the CBS Jumbo-Tron is on and the CBS Jumbo-Tron. If the CBS Jumbo-Tron shows video without license then it is the right of the one being infringed to have that desist and request compensation. A custom flash player written by online video company MyHeavy.com that overlays their logo, display ads on top prior to rolling and such is clearly different to any observer and the consumer from a browser. We can discuss the technical differences through many messages. But this product is obvious to any consumer, technical or not, as a commercial presentation of a video. And even if it did, so what? You have zero chance of controlling the behavior of all the third parties who can author an FLV player in Flash, while you definitely have the ability to force them to respect your wishes using Referer headers. That puts the responsibility on the content creator to continually hunt down infringers and put them on notice. There's no incentive to stop future infringement. It's like spam filtering. You could insist that spammers stop if you yell STOP loud enough, and you could even put your theory into practice by yelling until you ran out of breath, but you wouldn't achieve anything. Installing a spam filter would be a better idea. MyHeavy (and Veoh before them) are not spammers. They don't move to a new server, zombie a computer and such to continue their work. They are companies or individuals that will act professionaly if incentivized. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] why it's important to get angry
When I see a company stealing my video, putting their ads on it, not respecting with attribution or linkbacks, I get angry. I don't think it's because someone is profiting of my work. It's more like, they are *breaking* this new world we are trying to build. They are going against the reason why we are doing all of this, a possibility of a future where we do own our media, at least part of it. I'm not afraid to admit that I am mad that someone else is earning revenues from my work. Here's why-- establishing the bare-bones studio we now have has cost me very dearly. It's not only cost me money, which I don't mind parting with. It's cost me serious amounts of time. This is time I've diverted away from other things in my life, like working on my doctoral thesis. I've put all this labor into Freetime because I've believed in what I was doing and have believed that, in time, Freetime would begin to move under its own momentum. I've never taken a dime of revenue from my work. The most I've ever taken in compensation was a couple of free dinners when I spent a month working on a music video for a band. I've not tried to put a revenue model into Freetime because I haven't come up with a way to do it that didn't insult the subscribers or start to make Freetime become about making money. Freetime has had a financial goal of at best, break even, which is something that I figured we might do through revenues that don't come directly from Freetime. So, where I take umbrage is that MyHeavy.com has basically made it a fait accompli. They're now out there using my videos to create direct revenue through money-making models that I consider insulting to my audience. Moreover, they don't care. They didn't come to me and ask how I felt about the use of my content in such a way. I wouldn't have consented, even if they offered to share the money with me. I don't want my work being used in that fashion. It's more important that I preserve the cultural qualities of the project over any business model, because, for this project, I consider those to be most valuable. So, yes, I'm mad that they're making money off of it because they're basically making money by debasing my content. I'm even more mad that they're doing it without my consent. I'm even more mad than that because they know that they're doing it without my consent and they think that I won't notice, care, or stand up for myself. I'm also mad because they're also either using their made-up base of videos to fleece investors or their investors are just as crooked. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version...
I agree with both of you. The problem here is, that, like it or not, we have very little clout; a couple hundred thousand hits, hell a couple million, isn't even a drop in the bucket. We are very narrow in our reach. Especially as we tend to not lend our support to the mass markets of YouTube and MySpace. Sure our shit is better, but so was Beta. Raising some shit is good, but a protest requires one of two things: media coverage to pressure the powerful or fear of the rabble storming the castle. This is the main reason that the pro-peace protests in the run up to the US Invasion of Iraq did nothing; there was no media coverage, and contrary to the Johnson-Nixon era, there was no fear of the rabble storming the castle. How do we give our protest teeth? How do we get the corporate media to cover things that run against their interests? Or... How do we get them to fear us storming the castle? Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 4, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Mike Hudack wrote: It's a really big Internet, and Heavy is much more concerned with the 17 year old boy sitting in front of his computer at 11 PM than they are with you. How much influence do you have over that kid? -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Van Dijck Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:28 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version... Seems to me that we are doing quite well raising some shit. Don't think that laywers is the only thing a funded company is afraid off. Users raising shit scares them even more. Peter On 1/4/07, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't want to be a broken record, and I really hate to admit that I might have tinfoil hats tucked away for easy access, but if I were interested in putting down citizen media, and I had billions of dollars at my disposal, I would create a legal black hole to put folks like Blip out of business. It seems to me that Mike, and all of us, have 2 choices here: fight a David v Goliath through legal channels, or ignore it and become assimilated into the corporate media machine. Neither one is very appealing to me. Anyone else have any thoughts about this? I want to know how these jokers got millions invested in them? (squares up tinfoil hat...) And furthermore... What would be better than for open media to be killed by some of their own: young, goatee'd, hip, etc? Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Casey McKinnon wrote: I agree that we should blog about this, but I also feel they should not get the traffic... so perhaps we shouldn't link to them. I really wish we all had lawyers right now. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forget posting messages to MyHeavy, post your messages where the investors will see them. John is right.everyone should blog about it. this is your power. this is also how we all can educate... we can also point to these blog posts in future incidents. anyone have an old Veoh post when they were re-uploading videos to their service? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re:MyHeavy
I am glad to see this outrage...MyHeavy went too far. There is clearly a cause of action with damages. Is it time for a class action suit? Is there a NY lawyer around? Or perhaps a better way would be for all vloggers in NY to take MyHeavy to small claims court for the maximum. Ten small claims suits would be interesting to see. They are easy to file, and MyHeavy must devote resources to fighting them. The first step in a small claims action, at least here in California, is to demand payment. Where is MyHeavy's address? Who is running this company? D
RE: [videoblogging] Re:MyHeavy
Litigation is expensive and difficult. I've been on the phone with them, and I'm hopeful that we can resolve this issue with simple communication and without the need for lawyers. That said, if we have to, we'll have our attorneys send them a nastygram. We're not at that point yet, though. Soon, maybe. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of danielmcvicar Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:10 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re:MyHeavy I am glad to see this outrage...MyHeavy went too far. There is clearly a cause of action with damages. Is it time for a class action suit? Is there a NY lawyer around? Or perhaps a better way would be for all vloggers in NY to take MyHeavy to small claims court for the maximum. Ten small claims suits would be interesting to see. They are easy to file, and MyHeavy must devote resources to fighting them. The first step in a small claims action, at least here in California, is to demand payment. Where is MyHeavy's address? Who is running this company? D Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Quicktime Vulnerability Issues
http://newteevee.com/2007/01/03/vulnerability-discovered-in-apple-quicktime/ Vulnerability Discovered in Apple QuickTimehttp://newteevee.com/2007/01/03/vulnerability-discovered-in-apple-quicktime/ 12 Written by Jackson West http://newteevee.com/author/jackson-west/-Posted Wednesday, January 3, 2007 at 1:00 PM PT The Month of Apple Bugs http://projects.info-pull.com/moab/13 project is pretty much what it sounds like a month devoted to finding, proving and publishing the details of exploits in Apple hardware and software. Any coincidence that it's scheduled for the same month as MacWorld can be chalked up to ironic humor on the part of cheeky hackers. So far, the biggest story has been the discovery of a buffer-overflow vulnerability http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-6146615.html14 that can affect Windows and Macintosh machines running QuickTime 7.1.3. All the attacker has to do is send a bogus call to a the RTSP (Real Time Streaming Protocol) URL handler via HTML, JavaScript or through a QuickTime QTL file. How can you defend yourself? According to LMH and Kevin Finisterre who discovered the vulnerability http://projects.info-pull.com/moab/MOAB-01-01-2007.html 15, The only potential workaround would be to disable the rtsp:// URL handler, uninstalling Quicktime or simply live with the feeling of being a potential target for pwnage. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] re: Embedded player question
I use Blip.tv combined with http://www.freevideocoding.com to post my videos on various projects. Blip.tv provides free video hosting and tracks views (as Steve pointed out). Blip.tv also provides direct links to the videos. A direct link to your video allows you to use http://www.freevideocoding.com to make html for you in any way shape or form you want. I love using Blip.tv's direct .flv link and http://www.freevideocoding.com together because FVC has jeron Flash player built into code so your viewers get easy viewability just like most video hosts provide. Nerissa ### 9a. Embedded player question Posted by: Mark Westin [EMAIL PROTECTED] throbbingcow Date: Tue Jan 2, 2007 1:04 pm ((PST)) Hi folks - I'm more of a content guy than a tech guy, so I hope some of you with tech expertise can explain something to me. I'm working on building a vlog for a friend, trying to write the code myself and learn by doing. We're trying to figure out a player that can be embedded on other people's sites, as opposed to just putting a link or a screen capture image there. I use blip now, and I know we could also go with YouTube or any number of others, but then when people watch the videos, the site whose player it is gets credit for the traffic. We'd like to be able to get the traffic when people watch our video, wherever it ends up. I also know bandwidth will get expensive, but put that part aside for the moment. Is it possible within reasonable time and expense to build an embedded player that brings the traffic back to my site, no matter where the player ends up? (and as I said, I'm still not much of a tech guy, so if I've phrased anything incorrectly, please let me know and I won't be offended.) Thanks, Mark __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] why it's important to get angry
And since it's earlly days still, I think we HAVE to shout out about this. We have to make a fuzz. We have to sue, if necessary. If not, 100s of other companies will do the same. We have to set the rules, or they will set them, and that won't be good. And that's why it's good to get angry. Because it makes us take the time to send that email, although we know we won't get a response, to write that blogpost, although it's just a blogpost, to digg that digglink, and so on. agreed. As Peter metioned in his talk at Vloggeron, companies will still listen to us in these early days. we are all helping shape the way online video works in these social networks. We can help shape the healthy habits. Video sites should provide linkbacks to the original blog post/hosting page. This should be normal and obvious. I also host much of my video on Blip.tv because it is the only video hosting site that allows me to attach a CC license to my video when I upload. (there should be more!) This license is in the Blip RSS feed. Any company can read the feed and see how they can use my video. This should be normal and obvious. If we dont speak up as Creators in these early daysno one will care when bad habits are formed and everyone is making money down the line. Remember, we are not talking about spam blogs who are impossible to deal withexcept through URL redirects. These are funded companies who are trying to do legitimate business. I have no hate for MyHeavy; I assume they'll fix their habits after today. Veoh and Network2 did a great job becoming more responsible. We're building an ecologyand what Creators want need to be in the center. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Heavy.com, the NYC-based broadband video firm, has received $12.
I met Bob Metcalfe earlier this year, and I sent him a heads up. -K, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Aldon Hynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote a fairly long blog entry about this on my blog, http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2117 Heavy.com and the dangers of social network investing I'm forwarding this on to some investors that I know. For those of you who have had your work improperly placed on heavy.com, can any of you provide me with specific links? Do any of you have other comments about my blog entry, or my dealing with the investors? Aldon
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Referer header is unreliable. Faking the Referer header *would* be a cause worth litigating, but they're not doing that.
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull http://vlogdir.com (a project) http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) http://interdigitate.com (otherly)
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Right, but not every user-agent responsibly reports the referer header. In most user-agents it's an option that can be turned off. Many (maybe even most) personal firewalls strip the referer header from outgoing requests. Windows Media Player, iirc, never sends it. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lucas Gonze Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:51 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Referer header is unreliable. Faking the Referer header *would* be a cause worth litigating, but they're not doing that. Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's correct. The problem is that we do want to be picky. We want to allow people to use VPIP to play back videos hosted on blip, but we don't want to allow them to use the MyHeavy player on MyHeavy.com (unless it's the content creator themselves making that decision, in which case it's OK). Make sense? The issue here is that it's always case-by-case, and I challenge you to create rewrite rules that don't include a narrow whitelisting of things like VPIP (which don't have usable user-agent reporting anyway). This is a case for Brainstorming. For example, what's wrong with a tool which allows each user to define a whitelist and blacklist? If that were doable it would be a wonderful competitive advantage for Blip. If I worked there I would propose that Blip be the first video hosting provider to allow users to define their own rewrite rules via a web-based UI.
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Searching their site, I can't actually find any videos that are via Google Video, and I note that the search on Freetime used to turn up a TON of videos other than mine, all of which have disappeared, too. But what do they care? They needed the site to look video-rich to attract users. They've seeded themselves now, and they can toss off their bad behavior with a mea culpa! -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Did the site break, or did they just clear out a chunk of their collection? An hour ago I found my videos in there, along with several others, simply by searching for 'hawaii.' Now, there's only one result. Ryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.6 (Build 6060) Comment: http://www.lightfantastic.org/pgp.txt iQA/AwUBRZ05Xs/o8udD/KcXEQJeqQCdEoxbatTexOa5LOsuDysfImGSsv8AoOWu 4pZ69AjagxVmM02XuV/oPQGn =pC8c -END PGP SIGNATURE- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Embedded player question
I use blip already and crosspost to my other blog sites from there. I think it works great. I know they track views but, the issue I'm working on is getting credit for the traffic. Because in starting to launch my next site I've met various sponsor/advertising types and they all tell me that in order to attract their interest I have to document traffic to my actual content (not just to how many views my content gets on blip, YouTube or anywhere else). Not really sure what the distinction is, but it's apparently important to them. So what I'm looking to find or build is my own embedded player that measures traffic to my servers. Freevideocoding looks cool and I will check it out further for my personal use. Thanks, MW --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Nerissa \(TheVideoQueen\) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use Blip.tv combined with http://www.freevideocoding.com to post my videos on various projects. Blip.tv provides free video hosting and tracks views (as Steve pointed out). Blip.tv also provides direct links to the videos. A direct link to your video allows you to use http://www.freevideocoding.com to make html for you in any way shape or form you want. I love using Blip.tv's direct .flv link and http://www.freevideocoding.com together because FVC has jeron Flash player built into code so your viewers get easy viewability just like most video hosts provide. Nerissa ### 9a. Embedded player question Posted by: Mark Westin [EMAIL PROTECTED] throbbingcow Date: Tue Jan 2, 2007 1:04 pm ((PST)) Hi folks - I'm more of a content guy than a tech guy, so I hope some of you with tech expertise can explain something to me. I'm working on building a vlog for a friend, trying to write the code myself and learn by doing. We're trying to figure out a player that can be embedded on other people's sites, as opposed to just putting a link or a screen capture image there. I use blip now, and I know we could also go with YouTube or any number of others, but then when people watch the videos, the site whose player it is gets credit for the traffic. We'd like to be able to get the traffic when people watch our video, wherever it ends up. I also know bandwidth will get expensive, but put that part aside for the moment. Is it possible within reasonable time and expense to build an embedded player that brings the traffic back to my site, no matter where the player ends up? (and as I said, I'm still not much of a tech guy, so if I've phrased anything incorrectly, please let me know and I won't be offended.) Thanks, Mark __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
This is a case for Brainstorming. For example, what's wrong with a tool which allows each user to define a whitelist and blacklist? If that were doable it would be a wonderful competitive advantage for Blip. If I worked there I would propose that Blip be the first video hosting provider to allow users to define their own rewrite rules via a web-based UI. this would definitely be cool. I could go into my Blip dhasboard and simply balcklist any site I didnt want to link to me. how complicated would this be on a user by user basis? Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Yes, my search for cirne came up empty. Looks like they removed both my blip.tv and Google Video entries. Yes! This is a human problem of disregarding a license. And the human responses have been clear, specific to the problem and resolved quickly. The interactions with Veoh and Heavy with the posts here, blogging, digg activity provide a precedence for other tech organizations to be aware of the situation. A technological solution would likely fall under the radar and not inform. -- Enric --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell taoofdavid@ wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the video when it plays (all without our permission or knowledge). I suggest you all check out the web site, see if they're doing the same to your videos and notify them by e-mail if they are also breaching your CC license (http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php). Best regards, Casey --- Casey McKinnon Executive Producer, Galacticast http://www.galacticast.com/ Yahoo! Groups Links -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sull
Re: [videoblogging] Sport's Governing Body Pulls the Plug
I thought I'd share with you the fact that golf's governing body (The Royal Ancient) has put pressure on The Carnoustie Golf Links and has had them remove the vlog of their preparations for The Open 2007. I was wondering if anyone else had had experience of this and if you thought we were likely to see more or less of this sort of PR 1.0 thing in the future? is there a link? id like to know the reasoning behind the take down? Licensing? jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Posted to Casey's digg: http://digg.com/tech_news/MyHeavy_Stealing_Works_Without_Permission#c4564127 or http://tinyurl.com/vpfdx == by HeavyCarson Hey guys we've taken the search and play functionality from Blip and Google down. After reading these comments and posts it's clear that we need to clarify our intentions. We have been testing a new search service on MyHeavy that will enable people to search for videos from a number of different sites on the internet, including google and blip. It is our intention to create a tool to find online video and to allow people to bookmark those videos in their own video widget on MyHeavy. We don't copy the videos onto our server, we provide the means to search and play the video in a seamless experience through RSS feeds. There is value in providing that kind of search service to our users. We're still working on it, and it's clear that we need to address a lot of your concerns before testing it further. If anyone would like to make sure their videos will not show up in our search, please contact us and we'll do so immediately. Our intentions are to build a great service, not to cause ill will. Thanks for all the feedback. == Bill C. http://wasteddays.reelsolid.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Searching their site, I can't actually find any videos that are via Google Video, and I note that the search on Freetime used to turn up a TON of videos other than mine, all of which have disappeared, too. But what do they care? They needed the site to look video-rich to attract users. They've seeded themselves now, and they can toss off their bad behavior with a mea culpa! -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell taoofdavid@ wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
They've just posted a comment about this on digg. Seems to be the 'we're a search engine' pseudo-justification. Someone please remind them of what happened to google image search! And argh, the old attempts to cling to an opt-out model when they relaunch their 'search facility'. Heres link to their comment on digg, along with a short quote from it: http://digg.com/tech_news/MyHeavy_Stealing_Works_Without_Permission#c4564127 Hey guys we've taken the search and play functionality from Blip and Google down. We have been testing a new search service on MyHeavy that will enable people to search for videos from a number of different sites on the internet, including google and blip. It is our intention to create a tool to find online video and to allow people to bookmark those videos in their own video widget on MyHeavy. If anyone would like to make sure their videos will not show up in our search, please contact us and we'll do so immediately. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell taoofdavid@ wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff on Google Video, YouTube, and MySpace, and they scraped me from Google Video. At least one of my videos is protected by conventional copyright, as it's been used for television and has been retooled for use in (and has been submitted to) film festivals. I recognize their logo. Heavy is the people who do American Suck Countdown, isn't it? -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Dear all, We found out today that MyHeavy.com has been re-posting our videos with a huge pre-roll banner ad and a second huge ad surrounding the
Re: [videoblogging] Re:MyHeavy
Well, mine has disappeared from Heavy, I did send them an e-mail, but they didn't get back to me. Thanks again, Mike, ever thought of running for President or at least Mayor of New York?? Paul Knight On 4 Jan 2007, at 16:23, Mike Hudack wrote: Litigation is expensive and difficult. I've been on the phone with them, and I'm hopeful that we can resolve this issue with simple communication and without the need for lawyers. That said, if we have to, we'll have our attorneys send them a nastygram. We're not at that point yet, though. Soon, maybe. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of danielmcvicar Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:10 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re:MyHeavy I am glad to see this outrage...MyHeavy went too far. There is clearly a cause of action with damages. Is it time for a class action suit? Is there a NY lawyer around? Or perhaps a better way would be for all vloggers in NY to take MyHeavy to small claims court for the maximum. Ten small claims suits would be interesting to see. They are easy to file, and MyHeavy must devote resources to fighting them. The first step in a small claims action, at least here in California, is to demand payment. Where is MyHeavy's address? Who is running this company? D Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
There's a message on the digg entry about this, http://tinyurl.com/yd349m , apparently from someone who works at Heavy: === Hey guys we've taken the search and play functionality from Blip and Google down. After reading these comments and posts it's clear that we need to clarify our intentions. We have been testing a new search service on MyHeavy that will enable people to search for videos from a number of different sites on the internet, including google and blip. It is our intention to create a tool to find online video and to allow people to bookmark those videos in their own video widget on MyHeavy. We don't copy the videos onto our server, we provide the means to search and play the video in a seamless experience through RSS feeds. There is value in providing that kind of search service to our users. We're still working on it, and it's clear that we need to address a lot of your concerns before testing it further. If anyone would like to make sure their videos will not show up in our search, please contact us and we'll do so immediately. Our intentions are to build a great service, not to cause ill will. Thanks for all the feedback. === So it looks like their search which goes through blip.tv, google video and others is currently off. -- Enric --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Searching their site, I can't actually find any videos that are via Google Video, and I note that the search on Freetime used to turn up a TON of videos other than mine, all of which have disappeared, too. But what do they care? They needed the site to look video-rich to attract users. They've seeded themselves now, and they can toss off their bad behavior with a mea culpa! -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell taoofdavid@ wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson ryanne.hodson@ wrote: everyone who is offended needs to write them an email right now http://www.myheavy.com/contact.php get their inbox filled by the morning. On 1/3/07, J. Rhett Aultman wlight@ wrote: Thanks, Casey, and well done. For the record, guys, it's not just Blip.TV. I started using Veoh.com as a way to easily get my stuff
[videoblogging] CALL TO ARMS! was Re:MyHeavy
I agree with you Mike that Litigation is expensive and difficult, but honestly, heavy.com can afford to pay for back revenues they have generated. That's all I want. In Web2.0 Land, part of the money-making scheme is having users populate a site with content to make the site valuable. We have brought value to heavy.com and some sort of compensation should be asked for. It's the beginning of the year; perfect time for tipping over large monuments. Or rattling cages. Or just asserting the fact that what I do has some value to these companies. YOU BRING VALUE TO MULTIPLE WEB COMPANIES. Time to get paid when someone steps up and takes your value for granted. And then, with this money, maybe we could have a slush fund to help others. (Though I just want to give my part to blip.tv to pay for hosting for the last year!:) We are ripe for a beautiful lawsuit. One that will take these companies to task and make a new chapter in the Court of Copyright. This is trail-blazing stuff that can affect online video makers for the foreseeable future. I'm serious. I haven't had coffee yet, and I'm still ready to sue! (I hope this doesn't make me sound like a Sue-Happy American, I'm not really like that. I just think this is important to lock down.) Schlomo http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://hatfactory.net http://evilvlog.com On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Litigation is expensive and difficult. I've been on the phone with them, and I'm hopeful that we can resolve this issue with simple communication and without the need for lawyers. That said, if we have to, we'll have our attorneys send them a nastygram. We're not at that point yet, though. Soon, maybe.
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
This is a case for Brainstorming. For example, what's wrong with a tool which allows each user to define a whitelist and blacklist? If that were doable it would be a wonderful competitive advantage for Blip. If I worked there I would propose that Blip be the first video hosting provider to allow users to define their own rewrite rules via a web-based UI. this would definitely be cool. I could go into my Blip dhasboard and simply balcklist any site I didnt want to link to me. how complicated would this be on a user by user basis? That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this.
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
They have disabled their aggregation functionality entirely for the time being. I just got off the phone with their CEO, who was very contrite. We'll be meeting with them next week to figure out how to do this right, and allow people to opt in and out from blip using MediaRSS. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Ozawa Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:29 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Did the site break, or did they just clear out a chunk of their collection? An hour ago I found my videos in there, along with several others, simply by searching for 'hawaii.' Now, there's only one result. Ryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.6 (Build 6060) Comment: http://www.lightfantastic.org/pgp.txt iQA/AwUBRZ05Xs/o8udD/KcXEQJeqQCdEoxbatTexOa5LOsuDysfImGSsv8AoOWu 4pZ69AjagxVmM02XuV/oPQGn =pC8c -END PGP SIGNATURE- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Re: upcoming Flash features of vPIP
Thanks Carl! --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, CarLBanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That looks awesome Enric! On 1/4/07, RANDY MANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thats averry cool player enric. how can i use that randy On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.com wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://thenameiwantedwastaken.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: upcoming Flash features of vPIP
I should have it available within two to three weeks (or earlier) on my vpip site. I'll put a post up here when it's ready. First I want to make the vPIP code more modular and object oriented so it can be more easily extended. -- Enric --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, RANDY MANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thats averry cool player enric. how can i use that randy On 1/3/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
looks like any blip related search yields nothing but some videos still exist like from direct links: *http://tinyurl.com/y54hcd* maybe they're just in the process of fixing this all but the search seems purged On 1/4/07, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a case for Brainstorming. For example, what's wrong with a tool which allows each user to define a whitelist and blacklist? If that were doable it would be a wonderful competitive advantage for Blip. If I worked there I would propose that Blip be the first video hosting provider to allow users to define their own rewrite rules via a web-based UI. this would definitely be cool. I could go into my Blip dhasboard and simply balcklist any site I didnt want to link to me. how complicated would this be on a user by user basis? Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
On a related note, how can 3rd parties go about accessing the creative commons or copyright licence attached to blip.tv videos? Im afraid I havent studied this to see what blip already does, is the cc stuff included in the blip RSS feed, or through an API if you offer one? And thanks again, though I dont use blip or make any video, you definately deserve some sort of award for listening, responding helping, a shining example for all other web services. Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Yes, my search for cirne came up empty. Looks like they removed both my blip.tv and Google Video entries. Yes! not so simple. i assume they are still working on it. A search on MyHeavy brings back no results of any of the videos off of Blip. http://www.myheavy.com/search But my deep links are are still there. http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/file/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flvamp;video_title=Big%20Momentshowingamp;video_desc=amp;video_author_name=Blip%20TVamp;video_author_url=http%3A//blip.tvamp;video_thumb_url=http%3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing569.jpg so lets see if they actually take down the videos they are linking to now...or will they just disable the search. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
Re: [videoblogging] why it's important to get angry DO SOMETHING
Rhett, I envision you reading this as a statement from behind a podium. What if we all made solid articulate speeches, in a standard, 'mainstream' media environment. It should be easy for us to put together a podium and some decent lighting to at least replicate a 'mainstream' standard of broadcast. A statement like this, Rhett, read in a professional manner, accompanied by a bunch of others, could be a nice personal statement of our capability, our vision and our values. Personal statements are very important. I did a piece last year that made a national impact on the attempted destruction of Social Security. Right after this there was a rush to put a human face on Social Security. Check it out: http://www.dailykos.com/story/ 2005/2/21/4231/23967 . The issue was dead in 3 weeks. Personal appeals for fairness from the Person of the Year vs. de- regulation for corporate interests and other for profit legislation. The PR matchup looks good on paper. Of course it could be terribly boring, but we are all right here on the cutting edge of this medium. We know what it's all about. Perhaps this could be our play to be 'experts'. I haven't been that politically active, as I've been trying to start and maintain a business, but I do know that regular old people need to hear from the people on this list. My township council meeting last night glossed right over the 'local control of cable' fiasco that the corporate media are pushing here in Michigan. It was little more than half a sentence from the council member that attended a meeting. This is great stuff, Rhett. I am sure you could deliver it with passion and conviction. We all could. If that were played side by side with the shuck and jive of a media cartel CEO Net Neutrality would be a slam dunk. Maybe my councilman could have googled a video that told a different story about Net Neutrality and the attempted stamping out of an open and free internet by corporate interests I know that I am conflating only semi-related issues, but they have the same core. blah, blah, blah Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jan 4, 2007, at 11:00 AM, J. Rhett Aultman wrote: When I see a company stealing my video, putting their ads on it, not respecting with attribution or linkbacks, I get angry. I don't think it's because someone is profiting of my work. It's more like, they are *breaking* this new world we are trying to build. They are going against the reason why we are doing all of this, a possibility of a future where we do own our media, at least part of it. I'm not afraid to admit that I am mad that someone else is earning revenues from my work. Here's why-- establishing the bare-bones studio we now have has cost me very dearly. It's not only cost me money, which I don't mind parting with. It's cost me serious amounts of time. This is time I've diverted away from other things in my life, like working on my doctoral thesis. I've put all this labor into Freetime because I've believed in what I was doing and have believed that, in time, Freetime would begin to move under its own momentum. I've never taken a dime of revenue from my work. The most I've ever taken in compensation was a couple of free dinners when I spent a month working on a music video for a band. I've not tried to put a revenue model into Freetime because I haven't come up with a way to do it that didn't insult the subscribers or start to make Freetime become about making money. Freetime has had a financial goal of at best, break even, which is something that I figured we might do through revenues that don't come directly from Freetime. So, where I take umbrage is that MyHeavy.com has basically made it a fait accompli. They're now out there using my videos to create direct revenue through money-making models that I consider insulting to my audience. Moreover, they don't care. They didn't come to me and ask how I felt about the use of my content in such a way. I wouldn't have consented, even if they offered to share the money with me. I don't want my work being used in that fashion. It's more important that I preserve the cultural qualities of the project over any business model, because, for this project, I consider those to be most valuable. So, yes, I'm mad that they're making money off of it because they're basically making money by debasing my content. I'm even more mad that they're doing it without my consent. I'm even more mad than that because they know that they're doing it without my consent and they think that I won't notice, care, or stand up for myself. I'm also mad because they're also either using their made-up base of videos to fleece investors or their investors are just as crooked. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime [Non-text portions of this
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, my search for cirne came up empty. Looks like they removed both my blip.tv and Google Video entries. Yes! not so simple. i assume they are still working on it. A search on MyHeavy brings back no results of any of the videos off of Blip. http://www.myheavy.com/search But my deep links are are still there. http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/file/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flvamp;video_title=Big%20Momentshowingamp;video_desc=amp;video_author_name=Blip%20TVamp;video_author_url=http%3A//blip.tvamp;video_thumb_url=http%3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing569.jpg so lets see if they actually take down the videos they are linking to now...or will they just disable the search. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com I put a response on this on digg: It looks like the heavy video player just takes videos from references. In other words, the http line gives the video player the reference for the video on the web to play: video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/file/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flv or without the escaped code: video_url=http://blip.tv/file/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flv So you could provide any FLV file to the player and it would play. The problem as I see it is the search at MyHeavy.com was providing videos with CC licenses that prohibited playing on their video player. ;), Enric
[videoblogging] CALL TO ARMS! was Re:MyHeavy
Do we know how much revenue they generated dsirectly from blip google videos? Do we know how long they had the 'search engine' aspect of their site running before it got pulled down? I support you on one level with what you are suggesting, but there are several hurdles Id think carefully before trying to jump: 1) The company to be taken to court neds to be a serial offender who doesnt shift when there is a verbal web backlash. So far all the major offenders have corrected themselves, have listened, which makes it harder for me to see them as worthy of being made a legal example of. 2) Would any compensation actually even cover legal costs let along build up a slush-fund? 3) Consider the possible legal-precedent setting - could an undesirable outcome ensue where things are locked down? Some people on digg etc seemed to think this stuff would mean the end of the internet as we know it, which I dont agree with, but there is some potential danger of going too far I suppose? Dont want to end up penalising viewers, just commercial leeches. 4) Double-standards. During the network2.tv rant, it became clear that some of the old friendly homegrown services may be getting cut more slack by this group than new 'obviously commercial' services that we rage against. For example Michael Verdi noticed that fireant directory had added some adverts since he opted in, I didnt notice them responding here at all. I suppose at the end of the day I feel any money for legal battles could be better spend elsewhere, technology and blip.tv etc's influence, word of mouth and blogosphere backlash seem to have served the cause well so far. I guess I dont feel like seeing lawyers become another group that gets a load of cash ahead of the video creators! Although Im on the wrong continent I would love to help with some sort of content creators guild that would publicise and discuss these issues, if not go down the legal route. Although theres still a huge lack of detail, things like Baron Pulvers 'Abbey Corp' seems interesting, but my overriding cynicism means Id probably be more into such things if they were not-for-profit, or indeed a new type of UK company that has emerged in recent years. Listen to this description and ponder if it makes sense... Community Interest Companies Community Interest Companies (CICS) are limited companies with special additional features created for the use of people who want to conduct a business or other activity for community benefit, and not purely for private advantage. This is achieved by a community interest test and asset lock, which ensure that the CIC is established for community purposes and the assets and profits are dedicated to these purposes.Registration of a company as a CIC has to be approved by the Regulator who also has a continuing monitoring and enforcement role. Wibble! Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, schlomo rabinowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with you Mike that Litigation is expensive and difficult, but honestly, heavy.com can afford to pay for back revenues they have generated. That's all I want. In Web2.0 Land, part of the money-making scheme is having users populate a site with content to make the site valuable. We have brought value to heavy.com and some sort of compensation should be asked for. It's the beginning of the year; perfect time for tipping over large monuments. Or rattling cages. Or just asserting the fact that what I do has some value to these companies. YOU BRING VALUE TO MULTIPLE WEB COMPANIES. Time to get paid when someone steps up and takes your value for granted. And then, with this money, maybe we could have a slush fund to help others. (Though I just want to give my part to blip.tv to pay for hosting for the last year!:) We are ripe for a beautiful lawsuit. One that will take these companies to task and make a new chapter in the Court of Copyright. This is trail-blazing stuff that can affect online video makers for the foreseeable future. I'm serious. I haven't had coffee yet, and I'm still ready to sue! (I hope this doesn't make me sound like a Sue-Happy American, I'm not really like that. I just think this is important to lock down.) Schlomo http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://hatfactory.net http://evilvlog.com On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Litigation is expensive and difficult. I've been on the phone with them, and I'm hopeful that we can resolve this issue with simple communication and without the need for lawyers. That said, if we have to, we'll have our attorneys send them a nastygram. We're not at that point yet, though. Soon, maybe.
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Thats a technical issue. Those links arent really static links. The video.php file is clearly designed to take a url from the bit after the ? in the url. I could put a link to any video there and it would work. Hmm I think I fudged that explanation. Your videos arent really living on their server. The links you mention would be bad only if they were actually present on their site. But they arent (anymore, from what people are saying), so someone would have to manually type that url to see your stuff, its not an issue. OK heres another example. There are some fun scripts on the web that 'trananslate' pages into humourous stuff. You can feed them any webpage you like and they will translate it to something funny. So if the script was on a site called unquack.com then http://www.unquack.com/thescript.php?url=www.momentshowing.net would show people a silly version of your site. But that doesnt mean theyve stolen all your content, and if they dont offer that url as a link then they couldnt be accused of virtual leeching/reframing either. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, my search for cirne came up empty. Looks like they removed both my blip.tv and Google Video entries. Yes! not so simple. i assume they are still working on it. A search on MyHeavy brings back no results of any of the videos off of Blip. http://www.myheavy.com/search But my deep links are are still there. http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/file/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flvamp;video_title=Big%20Momentshowingamp;video_desc=amp;video_author_name=Blip%20TVamp;video_author_url=http%3A//blip.tvamp;video_thumb_url=http%3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing569.jpg so lets see if they actually take down the videos they are linking to now...or will they just disable the search. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
[videoblogging] postcards
I have an emac with an iMage webcam and videocue pro. I am 65 years olds. I have some postcards that I wan to put on vblogs. WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO HOLD THEM UP TO WEBCAM SO SHAKING IS CUT DOWN I AM NEW TO THING GROUP AND MY COMPUTER IS LOCKED INTO CAPS. As I show the cards I would read what is on the other side. I could scan them but dont have a scanner. Rodli
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Thanks Steve. We do include the Creative Commons information in the RSS feed. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses On a related note, how can 3rd parties go about accessing the creative commons or copyright licence attached to blip.tv videos? Im afraid I havent studied this to see what blip already does, is the cc stuff included in the blip RSS feed, or through an API if you offer one? And thanks again, though I dont use blip or make any video, you definately deserve some sort of award for listening, responding helping, a shining example for all other web services. Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this. Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Hi all, The french press is talking about MyHeavy http://www.pointblog.com/past/2007/01/04/ myheavy_ne_respecte_pas_les_vloggers.htm Pointblog is one of the most important blog in France Nice day ;-) Loiez
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I doubt the direct links will be fixed because of the way the page works. The URL includes all the information necessary to render the page, without ever hitting the database. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ryanne hodson Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:47 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses looks like any blip related search yields nothing but some videos still exist like from direct links: *http://tinyurl.com/y54hcd* maybe they're just in the process of fixing this all but the search seems purged On 1/4/07, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a case for Brainstorming. For example, what's wrong with a tool which allows each user to define a whitelist and blacklist? If that were doable it would be a wonderful competitive advantage for Blip. If I worked there I would propose that Blip be the first video hosting provider to allow users to define their own rewrite rules via a web-based UI. this would definitely be cool. I could go into my Blip dhasboard and simply balcklist any site I didnt want to link to me. how complicated would this be on a user by user basis? Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com -- Author of Secrets of Videoblogging http://tinyurl.com/me4vs Me http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com Educate http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org Community Capitalism http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com iChat/AIM VideoRodeo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
See my earlier e-mail about this. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jay dedman Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:48 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Yes, my search for cirne came up empty. Looks like they removed both my blip.tv and Google Video entries. Yes! not so simple. i assume they are still working on it. A search on MyHeavy brings back no results of any of the videos off of Blip. http://www.myheavy.com/search But my deep links are are still there. http://www.myheavy.com/video.php?video_url=http%3A//blip.tv/fi le/get/Ryanne-BigMomentshowing537.flvamp;video_title=Big%20Mo mentshowingamp;video_desc=amp;video_author_name=Blip%20TVamp;video_au thor_url=http% 3A//blip.tvamp;video_thumb_url=http%3A//blip.tv/uploadedFiles /Ryanne-BigMomentshowing569.jpg so lets see if they actually take down the videos they are linking to now...or will they just disable the search. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Yes. We're meeting with them next week to figure out how they can do this properly. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Enric Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 12:47 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses There's a message on the digg entry about this, http://tinyurl.com/yd349m , apparently from someone who works at Heavy: === Hey guys - we've taken the search and play functionality from Blip and Google down. After reading these comments and posts it's clear that we need to clarify our intentions. We have been testing a new search service on MyHeavy that will enable people to search for videos from a number of different sites on the internet, including google and blip. It is our intention to create a tool to find online video and to allow people to bookmark those videos in their own video widget on MyHeavy. We don't copy the videos onto our server, we provide the means to search and play the video in a seamless experience through RSS feeds. There is value in providing that kind of search service to our users. We're still working on it, and it's clear that we need to address a lot of your concerns before testing it further. If anyone would like to make sure their videos will not show up in our search, please contact us and we'll do so immediately. Our intentions are to build a great service, not to cause ill will. Thanks for all the feedback. === So it looks like their search which goes through blip.tv, google video and others is currently off. -- Enric --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, J. Rhett Aultman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Searching their site, I can't actually find any videos that are via Google Video, and I note that the search on Freetime used to turn up a TON of videos other than mine, all of which have disappeared, too. But what do they care? They needed the site to look video-rich to attract users. They've seeded themselves now, and they can toss off their bad behavior with a mea culpa! -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Howell Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:59 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Update. It appears that all my videos have been remove from their site. Such a shame too. I was thinking that $68,000 would have made a nice donation to Blip. Sorry Mike. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Howell taoofdavid@ wrote: I havent heard anything back from them yet. Maybe they are looking for their checkbook to send me my $68,000? ha! David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Man, I take a break from the web for a night and all hell breaks loose Has anyone heard from Myheavy? Mike, Casey, David anyone? My vids are one there as well and I will need to send an email but are we hearing back, or are they turning a deaf ear? Please let me know and the group as well. Thanks Heath http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull sulleleven@ wrote: I didnt realize before that the digg was to my blog post. so, i made a more entertaining image to go along with it http://spreadthemedia.org/files/ohmyheavy.jpg ;) night. sull On 1/4/07, Casey McKinnon caseymckinnon@ wrote: Good news, folks. The story has now made the front page of Digg. You can join the discussion there if you feel like defending your creative commons licenses. Casey --- http://www.galacticast.com/ --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: So very offended. Very very. Not only did I write them an email, I wasn't sure which dep't option to send it to (Business? Advertising? Abuse? Sales?) so I copied/ pasted it to all of them just to make sure. I also dugg the digg. So very cranky. Cranky cranky. Bekah -- http://www.missbhavens.com --- In
[videoblogging] Re: postcards
Greetings, Id improvise with some sort of stand that you attach the postcards to, or something you lean them against or stick them to. Then experiment getting the right distance between the postcard and your camera. Finally, experiment with your lighting in the room a bit so that the postcards are well lit, as that can affect webcam quality dramatically. OK I just reread your message and you want to read the other side of the postcard at the same time. I guess leaning them against something is therefore out of the quastion, unless its see-through. I guess you need some sort of stand that just attaches to the side of the postcards so that the back isnt obscured. Or hang them off something thats attach to the ceiling or walls, sort of a washing line for postcards. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, RODLI PEDERSON [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have an emac with an iMage webcam and videocue pro. I am 65 years olds. I have some postcards that I wan to put on vblogs. WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO HOLD THEM UP TO WEBCAM SO SHAKING IS CUT DOWN I AM NEW TO THING GROUP AND MY COMPUTER IS LOCKED INTO CAPS. As I show the cards I would read what is on the other side. I could scan them but dont have a scanner. Rodli
[videoblogging] CALL TO ARMS! was Re:MyHeavy
I note with a small degree of amusement that Gmail is offering me heavy.com - funny taylor hicks cartoon! ads. While it would be wrong to click it a few times just to cost them some marketing pocket-change, if anyone's sooo frustrated they just need to let off some steam
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Loiez D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, The french press is talking about MyHeavy http://www.pointblog.com/past/2007/01/04/ myheavy_ne_respecte_pas_les_vloggers.htm Pointblog is one of the most important blog in France Nice day ;-) Loiez Setting international standards :) -- Enric
Re: [videoblogging] postcards
One thing you could do would be to attach the postcard to a board and then point the webcam at the board and take a picture. That way there won't be any shaking. While you're at it, put some light on the postcard. BTW, here's a way to shut off caps lock. On your mac, if you go to System Preferences under the APPLE menu, and then click on Keyboard and Mouse, click on Keyboard at the top, then click on the Modifier Keys button. Make the Caps Lock menu select 'No Action' That way caps lock won't go on when you press that key... --Steve On Jan 4, 2007, at 1:32 PM, RODLI PEDERSON wrote: I have an emac with an iMage webcam and videocue pro. I am 65 years olds. I have some postcards that I wan to put on vblogs. WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO HOLD THEM UP TO WEBCAM SO SHAKING IS CUT DOWN I AM NEW TO THING GROUP AND MY COMPUTER IS LOCKED INTO CAPS. As I show the cards I would read what is on the other side. I could scan them but dont have a scanner. -- Steve Garfield http://SteveGarfield.com
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Mike Hudack wrote: this would definitely be cool. I could go into my Blip dhasboard and simply balcklist any site I didnt want to link to me. how complicated would this be on a user by user basis? That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this. mod_rewrite would be an obvious way to do this, but I think it would get inefficient for very large numbers of rewrite rules (which is what you'd have). Something in Otter's 'file/get' could be more efficient but only if the linkers linked that way, rather than linking directly to media files. As well as individual blacklists - which are the best way to go - it might be necessary to have a global blacklist for use against abusive 'search engines' who really won't take the hint. Another feature that would be useful would be to allow creators to choose to divert viewers to a different video (rather than just denying all access). For example, if someone deeplinks your video and puts ads all over it, you could redirect their viewers to a fifteen-second trailer instead, followed by a message that says You can see this video in full at ... In the long term, though, it's a social issue rather than a technological one. At the root of the problem is the assumption made by people like MyHeavy that anything on the Internet is theirs to do what they like with. They need to be educated out of that point of view. We can use negative pressure to encourage MyHeavy and friends not to freeload off other people's hard work, but that's always retroactive and reactive. It would be worth thinking about ways of applying positive pressure to get other sites to 'play nice'. We actually use the rel=license microformat to make it possible for spiders to detect licenses for videos (although technically rel=license specifies a license for the web page, rather than the linked video) and see which ones they can legitimately aggregate. What else could we do to make it easier for responsible aggregators to see what they're allowed to use, and for content creators to give their assent to particular uses? Meanwhile, here at blip.tv HQ, Captain Hudack has taken off his flying helmet and is painting another little company logo on the cockpit of his fighter, just beside the ones that read 'Veoh' and 'BitTorrent'. Two more confirmed kills and he'll be an ace ... Angus
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Cheers for the info :) This means there is no technical barrier for 3rd parties to get this licence info from the same source they are getting details of the video, which is great. So for example when there was a hooha about network2.tv not showing the license details on the page, they could get this info from the same place they get the links etc, which is good to know. Regarding the proposed options for blip.tv users to specify which services their stuff can be re-embedded in, it might get painful if it ends up with a huge list of sites to opt in or out of. Perhaps another way would just be to give people the option to give away one more right in addition to the ones they grant via creative commons choices. Something like 'creative commons whatever + noncommercial' +mayadd adverts. So thats the same as a normal CC licence but also with the option to grant the right to reshow the video with adverts. Is there any scope for clearly defining specific rights as part of MediaRSS type feeds? Hmm I think my idea is half-baked, are there any people here who dont mind there videos being reused on sites with adverts, that could talk about this? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Steve. We do include the Creative Commons information in the RSS feed. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses On a related note, how can 3rd parties go about accessing the creative commons or copyright licence attached to blip.tv videos? Im afraid I havent studied this to see what blip already does, is the cc stuff included in the blip RSS feed, or through an API if you offer one? And thanks again, though I dont use blip or make any video, you definately deserve some sort of award for listening, responding helping, a shining example for all other web services. Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this. Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Steve, I think that for the time being at least there's a manageable group of worthwhile aggregation destinations, and it's possible for us to offer opt-in and opt-out from them within the dashboard. Moving forward we may go to a more freeform system, where we allow people to opt-in or out based on arbitrary strings in referrer tags or organization identifiers in MediaRSS. I don't think we're at the point where the standards are sufficiently mature or there are enough players for this to be necessary, though. Soon, probably. This has happened four times in a major way, and maybe half a dozen in more subdued ways. We need to develop a set of best practices, followed by technology to enforce those best practices from the content creator and distributor level. We're working to pioneer both sides of that conversation, and we've had repeated engagements with folks to try to set those standards. As it happens I'm sitting down with Heavy's CEO and CTO next Wednesday to discuss these very issues. It's time for the crowd to recommend solutions. MyHeavy is now willing to play ball by your rules. Write the rules. I'll convey them. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Cheers for the info :) This means there is no technical barrier for 3rd parties to get this licence info from the same source they are getting details of the video, which is great. So for example when there was a hooha about network2.tv not showing the license details on the page, they could get this info from the same place they get the links etc, which is good to know. Regarding the proposed options for blip.tv users to specify which services their stuff can be re-embedded in, it might get painful if it ends up with a huge list of sites to opt in or out of. Perhaps another way would just be to give people the option to give away one more right in addition to the ones they grant via creative commons choices. Something like 'creative commons whatever + noncommercial' +mayadd adverts. So thats the same as a normal CC licence but also with the option to grant the right to reshow the video with adverts. Is there any scope for clearly defining specific rights as part of MediaRSS type feeds? Hmm I think my idea is half-baked, are there any people here who dont mind there videos being reused on sites with adverts, that could talk about this? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Steve. We do include the Creative Commons information in the RSS feed. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses On a related note, how can 3rd parties go about accessing the creative commons or copyright licence attached to blip.tv videos? Im afraid I havent studied this to see what blip already does, is the cc stuff included in the blip RSS feed, or through an API if you offer one? And thanks again, though I dont use blip or make any video, you definately deserve some sort of award for listening, responding helping, a shining example for all other web services. Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: That is interesting. I'm going to noodle on this. Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Mike Hudack wrote: They have disabled their aggregation functionality entirely for the time being. I just got off the phone with their CEO, who was very contrite. We'll be meeting with them next week to figure out how to do this right, and allow people to opt in and out from blip using MediaRSS. Presumably this will be a tag anyone can use? There is no licence tag in MediaRSS at present right? joly --- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---
RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
We're embedding two types of control metadata in our RSS right now. First up is Creative Commons metadata using the creativeCommons namespace: creativeCommons:licensehttp://address.of.license/foo/bar//creativeCom mons:license Second is MediaRSS aggregation restriction: media:restriction relationship=deny type=uriurn:yahoo/media:restriction One of the things we'll be working with MyHeavy on is their respect for media:restriction. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WWWhatsup Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:28 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses Mike Hudack wrote: They have disabled their aggregation functionality entirely for the time being. I just got off the phone with their CEO, who was very contrite. We'll be meeting with them next week to figure out how to do this right, and allow people to opt in and out from blip using MediaRSS. Presumably this will be a tag anyone can use? There is no licence tag in MediaRSS at present right? joly --- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com --- Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Den 04.01.2007 kl. 16:20 skrev Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: That's correct. The problem is that we do want to be picky. We want to allow people to use VPIP to play back videos hosted on blip, but we don't want to allow them to use the MyHeavy player on MyHeavy.com (unless it's the content creator themselves making that decision, in which case it's OK). Make sense? The issue here is that it's always case-by-case, and I challenge you to create rewrite rules that don't include a narrow whitelisting of things like VPIP (which don't have usable user-agent reporting anyway). Not to mention that Referer and User Agent headers are arbitrary and it would be less than trivial for a myheavy.com site to identify itself as blip.tv or vPIP respectively. If it wanted to. -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/
[videoblogging] Opportunity to set video net standards (re:MyHeavy Issue)
Interestingly I found at the top of diggs tech area a post that relates to the issue with MyHeavy: http://digg.com/tech_news/MySpace_Gets_Goatse_d (Warning, goatse image linked in article) The blog entry referred to is at: http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000278.html In the blog article Jason Scott uses the funny incident of replacing his grim reaper image with goatse to go into stages of development as the internet is popularized. The analogy of time in air flight where everyone could be a pilot (know how to fly a simple plane) to the present when few pilots compare to many passengers is given. It's related to in September 2003 when AOL opened it's user base to the internet and a relatively small and civil organization that assimilated smoothly new users to experts changed to a mass of newbies to a much smaller group of internet techies. We're probably at a similar transition stage where there are many casual viewers and uploaders on YouTube and a smaller, but still influential group of experts, us, setting standards and best practices. Companies and people are coming in, but not fully established, and there's an opportunity to set methods and standards that can benefit everyone who wants to make good use of video on the net. In matter of time the number of established companies and larger population of users with their established methods will no longer be influenced. -- Enric -==- http://www.cirne.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Peter Van Dijck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some people have mentioned that the anger many of us feel is somehow unjustified or dumb. I do feel real *anger* when I see this? And I think many of us do. Why? I've been thinking about that. When I see a company stealing my video, putting their ads on it, not respecting with attribution or linkbacks, I get angry. I don't think it's because someone is profiting of my work. It's more like, they are *breaking* this new world we are trying to build. They are going against the reason why we are doing all of this, a possibility of a future where we do own our media, at least part of it. And since it's earlly days still, I think we HAVE to shout out about this. We have to make a fuzz. We have to sue, if necessary. If not, 100s of other companies will do the same. We have to set the rules, or they will set them, and that won't be good. And that's why it's good to get angry. Because it makes us take the time to send that email, although we know we won't get a response, to write that blogpost, although it's just a blogpost, to digg that digglink, and so on. Peter -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net
[videoblogging] Re: upcoming Flash features of vPIP
Wow! Nice Enric. I'm debating on picking up a license for Flex 2.0 and charting to see what we can do w/ video in AS 3.0. Keep us abreast this project...Very cool! --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric
Re: [videoblogging] Sport's Governing Body Pulls the Plug
Jay dedman wrote: is there a link? id like to know the reasoning behind the take down? Licensing? jay Well the link was at http://www.carnoustiegolflinks.co.uk/vlog/ but as you can see it's gone. I was asked to take it down by The Carnoustie Golf Links after the Royal Ancient applied pressure. There was no Licensing issue, the RA just wanted there to be one singer, one voice; like I said it's total PR 1.0 BS, they want to control the message and not engage in a conversation. The thing is it wasn't even their vlog, it was the host venue's. They applied pressure to the hosts (my customer) and made them take it down, so it's not even their water they poisoned. -- Cheers, Gary http://www.garyshort.org/
[videoblogging] Re: upcoming Flash features of vPIP
I shall, thanks for the interest. -- Enric -==- http://www.cirne.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, taulpaulmpls [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow! Nice Enric. I'm debating on picking up a license for Flex 2.0 and charting to see what we can do w/ video in AS 3.0. Keep us abreast this project...Very cool! --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Enric enric@ wrote: I've made a custom version of vPIP for a customer, TechnoLawyer. The changes are in the included flash FLV player (cirneViewer.swf): - The flash player is larger, 450x340. - The visual interface is loaded dynamically based on instructions from an xml file. So the interface is customizable. - The flash player can report views to a backend script (PHP, ASP, etc.) - The YouTube like features of Share and Replay buttons (customizable) are at the end of the video in Flash. The vPIP flash video is at: http://blog.technolawyer.com/2007/01/im_not_feeling_.html I'll start putting in this new version and documenting it in about a week or two. -- Enric
[videoblogging] Re: Opportunity to set video net standards (re:MyHeavy Issue)
Brilliant! (if a little strong, especially as many of the 'victims' were innocent of direct evilhotlinking because it was really the template designers fault). Anyway I especially liked this sentiment from his blog entry: Hotlinking in itself is not so bad, in my book. I certainly get people hotlinking to my textfiles and directories, skipping over my introductions and context to provide others with information that I'm hosting. I even have people link directly to images on the DIGITIZE sub-site to prove a point about catalogs or old computers or so on. But in all these cases, the hotlinking is in the course of providing knowledge. Someone is trying to inform others about a subject and my library is being utilized to share. I feel like this is right and good, and I encourage it. Good stuff, and a decent explanation of why people can embrace the technologies such as RSS and embedded flash players because it opens things up (no pun intended), whilst not feeling that this gives every commercial leech cart blance to share their work in the name of $ Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interestingly I found at the top of diggs tech area a post that relates to the issue with MyHeavy: http://digg.com/tech_news/MySpace_Gets_Goatse_d (Warning, goatse image linked in article) The blog entry referred to is at: http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/000278.html In the blog article Jason Scott uses the funny incident of replacing his grim reaper image with goatse to go into stages of development as the internet is popularized. The analogy of time in air flight where everyone could be a pilot (know how to fly a simple plane) to the present when few pilots compare to many passengers is given. It's related to in September 2003 when AOL opened it's user base to the internet and a relatively small and civil organization that assimilated smoothly new users to experts changed to a mass of newbies to a much smaller group of internet techies. We're probably at a similar transition stage where there are many casual viewers and uploaders on YouTube and a smaller, but still influential group of experts, us, setting standards and best practices. Companies and people are coming in, but not fully established, and there's an opportunity to set methods and standards that can benefit everyone who wants to make good use of video on the net. In matter of time the number of established companies and larger population of users with their established methods will no longer be influenced. -- Enric -==- http://www.cirne.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Peter Van Dijck petervandijck@ wrote: Some people have mentioned that the anger many of us feel is somehow unjustified or dumb. I do feel real *anger* when I see this? And I think many of us do. Why? I've been thinking about that. When I see a company stealing my video, putting their ads on it, not respecting with attribution or linkbacks, I get angry. I don't think it's because someone is profiting of my work. It's more like, they are *breaking* this new world we are trying to build. They are going against the reason why we are doing all of this, a possibility of a future where we do own our media, at least part of it. And since it's earlly days still, I think we HAVE to shout out about this. We have to make a fuzz. We have to sue, if necessary. If not, 100s of other companies will do the same. We have to set the rules, or they will set them, and that won't be good. And that's why it's good to get angry. Because it makes us take the time to send that email, although we know we won't get a response, to write that blogpost, although it's just a blogpost, to digg that digglink, and so on. Peter -- Find 1s of videoblogs and podcasts at http://mefeedia.com my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/ my job: http://petervandijck.net
[videoblogging] CC licenses in your feed
On a related note, how can 3rd parties go about accessing the creative commons or copyright licence attached to blip.tv videos? Im afraid I havent studied this to see what blip already does, is the cc stuff included in the blip RSS feed, or through an API if you offer one? This is a good point. There are very few feeds that have a Creative Commons License and enclosures in them. Blip and a couple others are the only ones Ive been able to find. Think about it. None of the big companies even acknowledge CC as far as I know. Google, Yahoo, Youtube,.. When you upload a video to a hosting site, that is the time to add a CC license. this is not common practice... this is why there are so few feeds that have a CC license in them. If these feeds existed, then itd be easy for these sites to grab videos based on the license for each video. For example: Ive been doing some work with SpinXpress.com. We want to allow people to search for media by license. This way you could grab media that you could use in your project non-commercially. or by attribution. or sharealike. or even commercially,. The license in the feed would allow SpinXpress to make these search choices available to you. so we have the infrastructure in place...now its a matter of getting these companies to adopt them. again, Blip.tv and Archive.org are great examples of video hosting sites that respect the creator...and make it easy for other companies to play nicely. For MyHeavy, Id love to use this as an opportunity to get them to acknowledge existing CC licenses..and to allow me to add them when I upload to their site. this would be a big win for everyone. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Thanks Mike! On Jan 4, 2007, at 12:05 PM, Mike Hudack wrote: Yup, it looks like they've cleaned their act up. I'm expecting a call from their CEO in a few minutes, so I'm guessing that will be the message he delivers. -- Steve Garfield http://SteveGarfield.com
[videoblogging] Re: Sport's Governing Body Pulls the Plug
Well theres a heck of a lot of money more than I guess 70 years of formal study of PR etc. Concepts such as controlling the message and selecting the 'public face of entity', and not letting people peer behind the curtain, are deeply embedded in much of the commercial, and indeed non-commercial world. So Im saddened it has happened to you, but rather surprised we havent heard more about this sort of thing happening. Even an internet forum that randomly sprung into existence with no commercial entity behind it, and that was run in the genuine spirit of being 'for its members', fell victim to the tempation for those making stuff happen to hide away from public discussions much. Us and them reared its ugly head even with no $ being involved at any stage. So even if we forget about the commercial instincts that are out there, the classic PR that will make many organisations remain in the past and avoid genuine vlogging etc, I think there are other human instincts which will cause similar stuff to happen. It seems related to me to phenomenon such as 'shying away from criticism'. I mentioned the other day how saddening lots of the text comments on youtube are, I wonder how many people have been putoff exposing a bit of themselves on the net forever as a result of these and other things. So we've got fear of criticism, and desire to feel 'in control' as major reasons why this sort of thing may happen. Thats before getting into any of the naffer reasons such as actually having something to hide or being excessively egotistical or obsessive about controlling own image. Of course its also very feasible that many commercial reasons may exist for keeping control and denying rights to do stuff with video to others. Personally I think that these and the previous reasons I said are fair enough in most instances, just the same as people have a right to privacy. Its certainly fair that this right should be lost under certain cases, eg a murderer is going to lose right to privacy during their trial etc, and a company that was harvesting organs to sell to rich old people deserves to be exposed. Its very tricky, a balancing act where I dont think generalisations will necessarily create any sane rules. Lets say for example Im putting on a conference, but I want to control who is allowed to video it. Well Im totally torn between the rights of people to video it, and the right to have some control over what happens at your own event. It probably sucks for all concerned,but the fear that leads to reactionary decisions is understandable. What really sickens me is when a shocking and important event is exposed via video (such as the alternative saddam hanging), and I see mainstream politicians and media talking heads talking about how disgusting the VIDEO is, and the fact that someone took the video without permission. Surely its the EVENTS that are shocking, and these sorts of responses to the video tell us a lot about our 'open and democratic' way of living. Rumsfeld was a classic example of this - always berating the media for covering the stories or releasing the photos or video, never mind the reality of what these things are depicting, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Gary Short [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well the link was at http://www.carnoustiegolflinks.co.uk/vlog/ but as you can see it's gone. I was asked to take it down by The Carnoustie Golf Links after the Royal Ancient applied pressure. There was no Licensing issue, the RA just wanted there to be one singer, one voice; like I said it's total PR 1.0 BS, they want to control the message and not engage in a conversation. The thing is it wasn't even their vlog, it was the host venue's. They applied pressure to the hosts (my customer) and made them take it down, so it's not even their water they poisoned. -- Cheers, Gary http://www.garyshort.org/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Been following this post. Fascinating stuff. Sull, Jay, Mike H, Enric... and everyone who's posted you all rock! I'm so glad we're getting beyond the knee jerk reaction and into the nitty gritty. I read every single comment in both threads... something like 140 comments. Riveting. One thing regarding the most recent posts about blip's role. While I like the idea of giving the users on blip the ability to manage a blacklist / white lists I think it's rather over the top at this early stage in the game. I encourage patience. I encourage one step at a time. First I would counsel Mike Hudack to ask what's the LEAST we can do to prevent this in the future. The second question being... what's the SIMPLEST thing we can do. The reason why is such a granular user level blacklist white list for refferrers could get extremely complex. Not just costing blip time and development... but also leading to an overly complex product for the end user. It's quite likely 99% of users will never edit such configuration... in which case it might be sheer noise. But this is not the only reason. There is an equally important reason I recommend patience. The reason WHY I don't believe in it... it I think we need to acknowlege that all problems do NOT have technical solutions. DRM... is such a folly... an attempt to codify fair use into the actual application and even hardware layer of technology and the net. User level refferer blacklisting might seem like a great idea... right now... but give it time... I would however recommend blip.tv take a step toward it in the near term and just create a global whitelist / blacklist. Ideally it'd just be used in case of emergencies... like this. Blip may find they never need a user level whitelist / blacklist control. The reason is this sort of messiness is actually a GOOD thing, a very good thing, because this discussion is absolutely necissary. It is actually IMPORTANT that you send emails to people requesting take down... just as it is important that Mike H go meet with these Myheavy.com people and talk about the issue. The point is blacklisting is jumping right over steps 1, 2, 3, and 4... and jumping right to step six. While I think in this case MyHeavy was an extreme... and extremely bad offender, the larger issue is not one of black and white. It's an issue of netiquette... specifically re-vlogging netiquette. While you could create massive blacklists and white lists on blip this won't evolvolve the debate over re-vlogging netiquette indeed it won't do ANYTHING for the 100's of independant vloggers who host their own media... or any other service like vimeo... or anyone. I actually suggest taking a look at how youtube solved the problem. I'm not saying it's right, but they put in a simple preference that allows users to determine wether their youtube videos are viewable on different webservices And then there's flickr... they allow you to turn on and off the blog it feature... or the view larger feature... and all sorts of stuff. The point is.. when you start looking around... perhaps refferer blacklisting is not the best solution... perhaps it is a little over the top... like hitting a nail with a twenty pound sledge hammer. I have a lot more to say on the issue. In fact this isn't the first time I've discussed it at length. My primer on revlogging ettiquette still sits on my website... It's still a pretty damn good primer on the issue and perhaps it's time I brought it up to date. http://mmeiser.com/wiki/index.php/Mike%27s_guide_to_re-vlogging_ettiquette#A_call_for_re-vlogging_etiquette Alt URL: http://tinyurl.com/cjcz7 Needless to say, now is the time fore everyone who cares to collaboratively throw in on a discussion or re-vlogging nettiquette and figure out what they think is important. Hopefully just by kicking it around in discussion Mike will have some great consensus when he goes to meet with MyHeavy.com Personally, I'm sort of glad this happened... I don't think any long term harm was done... (atleast not yet) And though MyHeavy.com was playing russin roullete, a dangerous game of potentially getting their pants sued off for copyright infringement... I don't think they're completely evil. I just think they were extremely foolish... especially with their recent 12 or 14 million (or whatever it was Jay Dedman said) in VC funding. There is an adage in copyright infringment. It's all fair use until money changes hands... then everything is suspect. Indeed there is a inverse relation between money and fair use. The more money one has the more likely to get their pants sued off for copyright infringement. Need I say anything more then youtube... or google news and image search to illustrate my point. Indeed google is at the VERY forefront of this issue of fair use preciesely because they're a HUGE monetary target. But I'm getting of topic. Now is the time to hash out some ideas on what is and what is not considered proper re-vlogging
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
to discuss these very issues. It's time for the crowd to recommend solutions. MyHeavy is now willing to play ball by your rules. Write the rules. I'll convey them. OK, the first rule is: If you used content without permission of the owner you have to pay the owner's asking price for that use. The first use without permission is not excusable. APPLIED RETRO-ACTIVELY, meaning that you pay up even though this rule was not in place at the time of transgression. This rule is to be applied on moral grounds and not only on legal grounds. The payments are to be made on the transgressor's initiative, meaning that the transgressor must contact the owners of the content and ask how much the owner wants for the use, and then immediately make that payment. For example, my own rate is $1000 for the first instance, and $500 per video per any part of a day. They used 11 of my videos and used them for at least part of one day, so the total they owe me is $6000. If they can afford to buy fancy prizes for cute models, they can afford to pay up right away. They can send that $6000 directly to my paypal account: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To speak frankly to the people at MyHeavy: there are no defensible moral grounds for taking something that does not belong to you, no matter how slight or great the value, your intent, awareness, or excuses! Step up to the plate and take responsibility for your actions. Whether or not you follow the rule above will be a clear indication your character. John Leeke
[videoblogging] Re: CC licenses in your feed
Yes, I remember this group tried to tackle these issues I guess 18 months ago but it got bogged down by legal or overly technical discussions, and the bottom line was that most people were powerless to add this info to their feeds themseves, and need all the major services to do it for them. Blip's approach is again a singing beacon. When we first talked about it it was pre-blip etc, so the problem was peoples blogging engines offering cc info in feeds. Now I guess whether feedburner include the cc info in feeds, and others such as blip, is more important as this is where most people are getting their feeds generated from. I havent looked at whether google or yahoo take creative commons in video into account, but I know they have addressed creative commons in other areas of their business. For example from the creative commons site: Mia Garlick, November 4th, 2005 Google now enables CC-customized searching so you can search for Creative Commons-licensed content on either Google or Yahoo!'s Advanced Search page. Creative Commons' own Find page now gives you to option to use either Google or Yahoo! for your searching. With two major search engines now enabling the dissemination of CC-licensed works, this enables greater dissemination of CC-licensed works and establishes CC's licensing infrastructure as an important component of the Internet. So they acknowledge it exists, getting it into their video services should require the right people within these companies to be connected to their video team. I wonder whether the quantity of commercial copyrighted material that is on these services may also be a factor, if they acknowledge the rights of each piece of indie work so strongly, it might draw attention to their rather hands-off approach to all the dodgy TV clips etc? OK so lets make a list of all the services that are a fully functioning link in the creative-commons chain. Blip.tv are clearly doing their part, hows everything else doing? Feedburner for example? Include everything, from blogging engines, video hosts to search engines and aggregators, online off. Id also love to hear on this group from anyone who feels that creative commons isnt suiting them for non-technical reasons. Eg those who post to blip using full copyright, what should this mean in practice for how your blip-hosted videos should work (or not) with third parties? And fair play to those who dont care to control their videos at all, are there many people releasing their stuff as public domain (or equivalent - no rights reserved)? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are very few feeds that have a Creative Commons License and enclosures in them. Blip and a couple others are the only ones Ive been able to find. Think about it. None of the big companies even acknowledge CC as far as I know. Google, Yahoo, Youtube,.. When you upload a video to a hosting site, that is the time to add a CC license. this is not common practice... this is why there are so few feeds th
Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com Tinfoil Version...
It's a really big Internet, and Heavy is much more concerned with the 17 year old boy sitting in front of his computer at 11 PM than they are with you. How much influence do you have over that kid? ahbut its a really small world. Im sitting here in Silicon Valleyand trust me...if you can shame the investors...no one will want to talk to them at the party. That's where it happens. By blogging and emailing, you help give people bad reputations. This is extremely important for industry funded companies who want to make the big bucks. As ive said before, they could also just choose to go the route of http://www.ebaumsworld.com/. But then they cut down on their ability to really hit it big. MyHeavy seems to be working on it. We dont need pariahs. we need companies willing to listen to creators...and who give respect. everyone can win in a healthy ecology. if not, the fist. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com
[videoblogging] MyHeavy.com, a call for discussion on proper re-vlogging ettiquette
I wanted to start a new thread. Basically this is a discussion of where not only Myheavy.com went wrong... but an opportunity to acknowlege and promote best practices for proper re-vlogging. Mike Hudack is going to meet with MyHeavy.com sometime in the next week or so and it would be nice if we could get together a pretty good concensus on proper ways to display others videos on your site. Here's my short list for the sake of starting discussion. These are not laws... nor are they rules of thumb... they are more things to keep in mind if you don't want vloggers flaming your and suing you. 1) clear attribution - the vlog name at a minimum, and the original post title if possible. 2) clear permalink back to the original blog post 3) no commercial usage, and no ads in the proximity of any embeded video unless permission is otherwise granted... i.e. no advertising on any page with an embeded video without explicit permission. 4) no transcoding or rehosting the video without permission 5) the licensce should be displayed if declared 7) sharing features such as email this, post to your blog, and others... must follow the share-a-like principal. In other words they MUST at a minimum contain a direct link to the original post (permalink)... and the original video. No bouncing or redirecting or obscuring of these urls for tracking purposes. For further reading... I did an OLD post on re-vlogging etiquette about a year and a half ago. Please ffeel free to use it as source. ---the below copied from an earlier email--- http://mmeiser.com/wiki/index.php/Mike%27s_guide_to_re-vlogging_ettiquette#A_call_for_re-vlogging_etiquette Alt URL: http://tinyurl.com/cjcz7 Needless to say, now is the time for everyone who cares to collaboratively throw in on a discussion or re-vlogging nettiquette and figure out what they think is important. Hopefully just by kicking it around in discussion Mike will have some great consensus when he goes to meet with MyHeavy.com Personally, I'm sort of glad this happened... I don't think any long term harm was done... (atleast not yet) And though MyHeavy.com was playing russin roullete, a dangerous game of potentially getting their pants sued off for copyright infringement... I don't think they're completely evil. I just think they were extremely foolish... especially with their recent 12 or 14 million (or whatever it was Jay Dedman said) in VC funding. There is an adage in copyright infringment. It's all fair use until money changes hands... then everything is suspect. Indeed there is a inverse relation between money and fair use. The more money one has the more likely to get their pants sued off for copyright infringement. Need I say anything more then youtube... or google news and image search to illustrate my point. Indeed google is at the VERY forefront of this issue of fair use preciesely because they're a HUGE monetary target. But I'm getting of topic. Now is the time to hash out some ideas on what is and what is not considered proper re-vlogging etiquette in the vlogosphere. I'd reccommend starting another post called a call for discussion on re-vlogging ettiquette or some such and tackling this issue. I think we all have a pretty good idea 1) clear attribution - the vlog name at a minimum, and the original post title if possible. 2) clear permalink back to the original blog post 3) no commercial usage, and no ads in the proximity of any embeded video unless permission is otherwise granted... i.e. no advertising on any page with an embeded video without explicit permission. 4) no transcoding or rehosting the video without permission 5) the licensce should be displayed if declared 7) sharing features such as email this, post to your blog, and others... must follow the share-a-like principal. In other words they MUST at a minimum contain a direct link to the original post (permalink)... and the original video. No bouncing or redirecting or obscuring of these urls should be allowed. Anyway, That's my start. As mentioned above, I have a whole article on this. From back in the day when Delicious started supporting media. It was at the time perhaps the first platform besides mefeedia where users could widely re-blog media. http://mmeiser.com/wiki/index.php/Mike%27s_guide_to_re-vlogging_ettiquette Looking back now the thing is still as on point as when I wrote it... about a year and a half ago... maybe more. Perhaps it is time for an update. Anyone want to collaborate on a whole new article? Feel free to use my article, and my wiki if you like. That's what it's there fore. Even better if there is some other community vlogging wiki space people are using now? Peace, -Mike mefeedia.com mmeiser.com/blog On 1/4/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We're embedding two types of control metadata in our RSS right now. First up is Creative Commons metadata using the creativeCommons namespace:
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
I can see where you are coming from with that sugestion, but it seems a tad OTT to me and would possibly harm the ability of a concensus forming around these 'rules'? Another problem with it is the concept of using something 'without permission'. At the heart of the abuses we have seen, is the fact that there are lots of different opinions from individuals and companies, about what 'permission' is. Specifically, you only have to read some of the digg comments or comments on some blogs about the network2.tv issue, to see that some people think that when you psot stuff on the net, you are giving people permission to do whatever they want with it. Clearly thats a wrong assumption to make, but there is a mess of grey when we consider exactly what permissions we are explicity granting. Creative commons helps sort that out, it states what rights we are giving without need for further contact. But it only works if most people understand CC a bit, and if an atmosphere is created where companies cannot plead ignorance. The longstanding ability of commercial sites to get away with hosting copyrighted TV clips just because they are 'viral' doesnt help us at all. The 'we are just a guide' and 'we are just a search engine' line from some offenders also tells us something about assumptions that are made. Even huge entities such as Google test the waters on copyright law a lot, to see just what they can get away with. I sincerely believe this discussion can be very fruitful, I hope it lasts here, and as an outcome I would like to see some videos that explain the 'rules' to people, in as clear a way as the creative commons videos do, indeed probably as an extension to them makes sense. Its the most hypocritical thing Ive said here as I always waffle in text and rarely video, and really, the power of video to convey the message is not something I need to tell people in this group about! And yet somehow we havent ended up with many videos about this stuff that are a clear guide. We get the odd angry rant and interesting abstract remix with a cutting edge, and those are great, but nothing like the creative-commons videos? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you used content without permission of the owner you have to pay the owner's asking price for that use. The first use without permission is not excusable. APPLIED RETRO-ACTIVELY, meaning that you pay up even though this rule was not in place at the time of transgression.
Re: [videoblogging] MyHeavy.com, a call for discussion on proper re-vlogging ettiquette
I'm interested in trying to develop better rules for scraping/linking off of sites like MySpace, YouTube, or Google Video. These sites seem to generally have and show information on who uploaded a given video...perhaps this is a good way to contact the creator and minimally inform them they're being shown on a new commercial website? I realize things like Google Video make things a little harder, because it's not like these nice RSS feeds you blip.tv folk get, but there's got to be a better choice than assuming that anything on Google Video is some kind of public domain. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime 1) clear attribution - the vlog name at a minimum, and the original post title if possible. 2) clear permalink back to the original blog post 3) no commercial usage, and no ads in the proximity of any embeded video unless permission is otherwise granted... i.e. no advertising on any page with an embeded video without explicit permission. 4) no transcoding or rehosting the video without permission 5) the licensce should be displayed if declared 7) sharing features such as email this, post to your blog, and others... must follow the share-a-like principal. In other words they MUST at a minimum contain a direct link to the original post (permalink)... and the original video. No bouncing or redirecting or obscuring of these urls for tracking purposes.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
comments below On 1/4/07, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: to discuss these very issues. It's time for the crowd to recommend solutions. MyHeavy is now willing to play ball by your rules. Write the rules. I'll convey them. OK, the first rule is: If you used content without permission of the owner you have to pay the owner's asking price for that use. The first use without permission is not excusable. APPLIED RETRO-ACTIVELY, meaning that you pay up even though this rule was not in place at the time of transgression. This rule is to be applied on moral grounds and not only on legal grounds. The payments are to be made on the transgressor's initiative, meaning that the transgressor must contact the owners of the content and ask how much the owner wants for the use, and then immediately make that payment. For example, my own rate is $1000 for the first instance, and $500 per video per any part of a day. They used 11 of my videos and used them for at least part of one day, so the total they owe me is $6000. If they can afford to buy fancy prizes for cute models, they can afford to pay up right away. They can send that $6000 directly to my paypal account: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To speak frankly to the people at MyHeavy: there are no defensible moral grounds for taking something that does not belong to you, no matter how slight or great the value, your intent, awareness, or excuses! Step up to the plate and take responsibility for your actions. Whether or not you follow the rule above will be a clear indication your character. John Leeke I couldn't agree with you more in MyHeavy.com's specific case... but not all cases are so cut and dry. There are all sorts of reasons for people to display your videos. 1) Search engines like Technoratti, yahoo video search displays thumbnails of videos to make the vlog space searchable. 2) bloglines, mefeedia, fireant.tv, vlogdir, and other user centric rss aggregators present videos embeded in page to provide an pleasurable viewing experience for people who subscribe to your blog. 3) All sorts of software from Democracy, to iTunes, to Fireant, and many more actually precache and display your videos in a desktop software to offer again... an enhanced viewing experience so your friends can keep track up with you. 4) you might want people to cross post your videos to myspace... or any other blog... it's now pretty common practice and great for exposure 5) In addition there are all sorts of other communities like Webjay, and dabble that provice all sorts of opportunities like remixing and playlist sharing and all sorts of fun stuff. 6) let's not forget all the videoblogging guides and direcotries I could go on... but just keep in mind that poorly behaving players like MyHeavy are the exception... not the rule. One last thing. The vlogosphere in general is shifting TOWARD liberal revlogging. This doesn't mean you have to encourage or participate... In fact perhaps we should discuss options for opting out. The reason the space is moving toward reblogging is because first of all major sites like youtube have demonstrated how effective it can be at attracting an audience. Secondly, business models such as post roll advertising are springing up that can actually take advantage of re-vlogging. Finally some science, when someone revlogs you your viewership can potentially grow exponentially very fast. When you vlog you may have 200 daily subscribers... of those 100 may watch your video. If even just 2 of those people re-blog your video and post it on their blog and they each have 200 daily subscribers you've trippled your viewership right there... and I need not tell you what happens from there if 2 more people reblog you on each of those blogs. This is ESPECIALLY apparent with services like delicious... and digg.com... and thousands of others like them. The bottom line is re-vlogging is precisely HOW... a video of a student getting tassered at a library in UCLA... or cell phone video of Sadam Hussein going to meet his maker travel around the web virtually instantly to millions and millions of users. If you vlog heavily and run a fairly popular blog which encourages revlogging and cross posting to digg and other services sooner or later one of your videos or blog posts is going to go viral or at the very least you'll get an exponential amount of viewers of the post. You see this ALL the time on social networks. I'm always amazed on youtube for example with some of the hot videos. A user will get 1500 average views on a video, and then one day they'll get 400,000 over night. This is not JUST do to cross-posting and re-blogging. There are other factors, there's stuff like favoriting... or rating... or bookmarking that have a similar effect... perhaps someone else can break it down... but I would say that cross-posting or reblogging on youtube is probably the biggest factor. The bottom line is if your videos never
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com, a call for discussion on proper re-vlogging ettiquette
I like your old guide, it may not need all that much of an update, need to hear from more creators on this, theres a hardcore who like to talk about these rights issues in depth, but many more who are angry enough to join in once a violation has occured, but for a multitude of valid reasons dont get into these discussions enough in the past to the level required to add a haevy weight of legitimacy to these rules we decide (ie who are 'we'? anyway) By mentioning etiquette you have reminded me of something. After the network2.tv thing, I noticed that Chris Brogan mentioned on his blog about such things. However his perpective, perhaps understandably, was how rude some people (I guess evilvlog mostly ha) had been to him. Sure network2 may have made a wrong assumption, but why did some people have to respond in such a vile and hateful manner? Well that just made me angry to be honest because there was zero acknowledgement that maybe rudeness isnt just ranked by using dirty words, but that maybe the violations that network2 committed were a larger case of rudeness than anything we said. So anyways despite being a bit angry about that, and clearly I still dont love network2 no matter how many people whove dealt with them in real life may be enjoying the koolaid, I wondered if it would be fair to reflect on this and also add something in the etiquette that refers to how violated vloggers should respond to the violators? Well maybe this is a silly idea, do we really have more chance of affecting these entites behaviour than our own? parp parp! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wanted to start a new thread. Basically this is a discussion of where not only Myheavy.com went wrong... but an opportunity to acknowlege and promote best practices for proper re-vlogging. Mike Hudack is going to meet with MyHeavy.com sometime in the next week or so and it would be nice if we could get together a pretty good concensus on proper ways to display others videos on your site. Here's my short list for the sake of starting discussion. These are not laws... nor are they rules of thumb... they are more things to keep in mind if you don't want vloggers flaming your and suing you. 1) clear attribution - the vlog name at a minimum, and the original post title if possible. 2) clear permalink back to the original blog post 3) no commercial usage, and no ads in the proximity of any embeded video unless permission is otherwise granted... i.e. no advertising on any page with an embeded video without explicit permission. 4) no transcoding or rehosting the video without permission 5) the licensce should be displayed if declared 7) sharing features such as email this, post to your blog, and others... must follow the share-a-like principal. In other words they MUST at a minimum contain a direct link to the original post (permalink)... and the original video. No bouncing or redirecting or obscuring of these urls for tracking purposes. For further reading... I did an OLD post on re-vlogging etiquette about a year and a half ago. Please ffeel free to use it as source. ---the below copied from an earlier email--- http://mmeiser.com/wiki/index.php/Mike%27s_guide_to_re-vlogging_ettiquette#A_call_for_re-vlogging_etiquette Alt URL: http://tinyurl.com/cjcz7 Needless to say, now is the time for everyone who cares to collaboratively throw in on a discussion or re-vlogging nettiquette and figure out what they think is important. Hopefully just by kicking it around in discussion Mike will have some great consensus when he goes to meet with MyHeavy.com Personally, I'm sort of glad this happened... I don't think any long term harm was done... (atleast not yet) And though MyHeavy.com was playing russin roullete, a dangerous game of potentially getting their pants sued off for copyright infringement... I don't think they're completely evil. I just think they were extremely foolish... especially with their recent 12 or 14 million (or whatever it was Jay Dedman said) in VC funding. There is an adage in copyright infringment. It's all fair use until money changes hands... then everything is suspect. Indeed there is a inverse relation between money and fair use. The more money one has the more likely to get their pants sued off for copyright infringement. Need I say anything more then youtube... or google news and image search to illustrate my point. Indeed google is at the VERY forefront of this issue of fair use preciesely because they're a HUGE monetary target. But I'm getting of topic. Now is the time to hash out some ideas on what is and what is not considered proper re-vlogging etiquette in the vlogosphere. I'd reccommend starting another post called a call for discussion on re-vlogging ettiquette or some such and tackling this issue. I think we all have a pretty good idea 1)
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com, a call for discussion on proper re-vlogging ettiquette
Ahh theres a big problem with number 4. It defeats a large chunks of the rights you are giving with any of the creative commons licenses. To the best of my knowledge the CC licences give people the right to copy, distribute, display, and perform your work providing they stick to the other rules such as non-commercial. Therefore if anybody is currently putting out videos with creative commons licences, there is nothing you can legally do to stop a non-commercial entity such as myself from rehosting redistributing your videos, providing I stick to all the other rules of the license you have selected. After all, without granting the rights to at a minimum copy, distribute, display and perform, then its pretty much a normal copyright that you want to use. Pegarding point 7, if you want to insist on permalinks then I believe thats probably compatible with creative commons, do it as part of the license where its up to you to declare how you want to be attributed. So lets talk some more about these things, we cant use creative commons as a starting point and then remove some more rights from it, can only use it as a platform to give away more rights! If people really dont want their stuff to be redistributed even non-commercially, then creative commons is not for you! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 4) no transcoding or rehosting the video without permission 7) sharing features such as email this, post to your blog, and others... must follow the share-a-like principal. In other words they MUST at a minimum contain a direct link to the original post (permalink)... and the original video. No bouncing or redirecting or obscuring of these urls for tracking purposes.
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
How it works in the courts... I did a bit of research as to how it works in the courts. There are 2 main parts: 1) Did they violate someone's copyright? (YES in this case) 2) Were there damages to the copyright holder? If the 2 conditions are met, the court then decides an appropriate penalty/award. The award has a lot to do with the damages that can be substantiated, as well as the original intent (for instance, was it malicious or inadvertant). Of course, IANAL, but thought I'd throw this into the fray. BTW Great work Mike! There's --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: to discuss these very issues. It's time for the crowd to recommend solutions. MyHeavy is now willing to play ball by your rules. Write the rules. I'll convey them. OK, the first rule is: If you used content without permission of the owner you have to pay the owner's asking price for that use. The first use without permission is not excusable. APPLIED RETRO-ACTIVELY, meaning that you pay up even though this rule was not in place at the time of transgression. This rule is to be applied on moral grounds and not only on legal grounds. The payments are to be made on the transgressor's initiative, meaning that the transgressor must contact the owners of the content and ask how much the owner wants for the use, and then immediately make that payment. For example, my own rate is $1000 for the first instance, and $500 per video per any part of a day. They used 11 of my videos and used them for at least part of one day, so the total they owe me is $6000. If they can afford to buy fancy prizes for cute models, they can afford to pay up right away. They can send that $6000 directly to my paypal account: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To speak frankly to the people at MyHeavy: there are no defensible moral grounds for taking something that does not belong to you, no matter how slight or great the value, your intent, awareness, or excuses! Step up to the plate and take responsibility for your actions. Whether or not you follow the rule above will be a clear indication your character. John Leeke
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com Disregarding Vlogger CC Licenses
Den 04.01.2007 kl. 23:18 skrev cooper3acd [EMAIL PROTECTED]: How it works in the courts... I did a bit of research as to how it works in the courts. There are 2 main parts: 1) Did they violate someone's copyright? (YES in this case) 2) Were there damages to the copyright holder? If the 2 conditions are met, the court then decides an appropriate penalty/award. The award has a lot to do with the damages that can be substantiated, as well as the original intent (for instance, was it malicious or inadvertant). Not in the US. To be able to collect statutory damages (ie. damages set by the court) you need to have your work registered with the copyright office. So do that before sueing - IIRC you have 90 days after publication to register. If you work is not registered with the copyright office you can only sue for proven, actual damages. - Andreas, IANAL either -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen URL: http://www.solitude.dk/
[videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy.com, a call for discussion on proper re-vlogging ettiquette
Following on from that point, heres some exceptionally clear stuff from the creative commons site: http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/fullrights All Creative Commons licenses have many important features in common. Every license will help you * retain your copyright * announce that other people's fair use, first sale, and free expression rights are not affected by the license. Every license requires licensees * to get your permission to do any of the things you choose to restrict e.g., make a commercial use, create a derivative work; * to keep any copyright notice intact on all copies of your work; * to link to your license from copies of the work; * not to alter the terms of the license * not to use technology to restrict other licensees' lawful uses of the work Every license allows licensees, provided they live up to your conditions, * to copy the work * to distribute it * to display or perform it publicly * to make digital public performances of it (e.g., webcasting) * to shift the work into another format as a verbatim copy Every license * applies worldwide * lasts for the duration of the work's copyright * is not revocable Note that this list of features does not apply to the Public Domain Dedication, our Sampling Licenses, or Founder's Copyright. So as you can see, this stuff is not compatible with the 'strong control' that is being suggested. I also find not to use technology to restrict other licensees' lawful uses of the work a very fascinating clause. The way I interpret it, it means that video hosts etc, must not restrict the viewers ability to copy the work, and therefore must not use any DRM or any of the gentler technologies that attempt to thwart people ability to download videos. More than a little interesting, the more I relearn about CC the more I remember the actual spirit of it, and feel that it may not be license that the majority of video show creators and services will actually want, especially if they need accurate viewing figures to get the right sponsorship deals. Personally Im in love with creators who want to do public domain or creative commons with derivatives allowed stuff, as the folk-like reuse of material is a wonderful thing, but only if the creator really wants to give that permission away and hasnt really though about all the occasions theyd like to restrict such stuff. Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ahh theres a big problem with number 4. It defeats a large chunks of the rights you are giving with any of the creative commons licenses. To the best of my knowledge the CC licences give people the right to copy, distribute, display, and perform your work providing they stick to the other rules such as non-commercial. Therefore if anybody is currently putting out videos with creative commons licences, there is nothing you can legally do to stop a non-commercial entity such as myself from rehosting redistributing your videos, providing I stick to all the other rules of the license you have selected. After all, without granting the rights to at a minimum copy, distribute, display and perform, then its pretty much a normal copyright that you want to use.
