Thanks for the reply David......a well thought out explanation.....I appreciate it..and more importantly I understand better now...
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "David Meade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/8/06, hpbatman7 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > What I don't get and maybe someone can explain this to me in a simple > > manner, (I am not a real tech guy, I know enough and am learning but > > on a thread like this I realize how much I don't know.) I put my > > videos out, what is to stop someone from putting my RSS feed into a > > site without my knowledge and how does that site know it's not me? > > > Nothing is stopping this, and in many cases this would be a good thing. > Getting more exposure to your site, and your videos. > > The key point is: is that site (which is collecting RSS feeds) just an index > of feeds (and thus simply pointing to the creators work via the links within > their feed) ... or a service like Veoh that downloads that content, alters > it, and rehosts it, and possibly even (as Veoh has done) fail to even > provide a link back to the origional artist ... thus inplying this content > is somehow affiliated with the service. > > Lots of great services do these things (hosting/transcoding/etc), but the > key point in the Veoh debate is that the content producers are not the ones > electing to have their work altered and rehosted. Requests for this altered > content never hit the producers servers so they never see the stats. They > have no way of knowing the altered content even exists ... and they have no > attribution giving them credit at this new site (which is a very simple > requirement of most of our cc licenses). > > And again I think the real sticking point here is that this isn't a case > like YouTube where the artists go to upload their content in order to get > these services ... this is someone taking the content from the prodcuer > without their knowledge, altering it, hosting it elsewhere, and displaying > as part of a larger video site without so much as a link back. > > What is to stop someone from uploading my video to "YouTube" and have > > it link back to "their" site? > > > Nothing. But at least in this case it's a user who's breaking the rules and > not the service/site itself. > > You can have all the "opt in" you want but by > > putting our video out there we all take the risk of > > someone "highjacking" our stuff........don't we? > > > Yup, no question. If a rouge user of YouTube is uploading my video thats > one thing ... but should we allow a commercial service be one of the active > hijackers? The commercial service itself should at least respect the > copyright (even if some of its users fail to) ... especially since most of > us have the license information embedded into the feed ... its all there. > > I hear what you're saying though. I've been a long time advocate of the idea > "If you have a feed, you're authroizing syndication .... wherever anyone > wants to syndicate it." However, those people syndicating it still need > to abide by the copyrights that are attached to the content within the feed. > > - Dave > > -- > http://www.DavidMeade.com > feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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/
