By reencoding footage they are on extremely rocky legal ground. They are actively redistributing content, and so they absolutely must adhere to peoples license. They cant try and wriggle around in the grey area that some who only embed videos have over this issue in the past.
They are also most definatly making commercial use of these videos, they are a company, its a business (see http://www.vibesolutions.net/vsg/htdocs/about/press_release-20070327.jsp for example) , and again by re-encoding and hosting I think the issue is much less grey. So they are commercial, so even if they properly honoured the other creative commons terms such as attribution and displaying the license, they are not granted the rights they are taking. The only grey I can see in this issue is if someone legally ruled that such use of video was not commercial. If I were that judge I would obviously not come to such a determination, being as the video is the main commodity that creates value for these businesses. They are not the first to cling to the DMCA ideas about copyright, that we must opt-out of this leechery. In the past some here have thought this an innapropriate defense, being as DMCA provisions apply to the likes of youtube and users uploading copyrighted clips on a manual basis. Wheras wholesale ripping of RSS syndication feeds on an automatic basis, doesnt quite seem within the spirit of that particualr DMCA mechanism, as Veoh found out to their peril. This conversation faded out again last time without any satisfactory conclusion to the 'show creative commons license on your site' issue. I was someone who wanted blip.tv to exert more pressure on its partners to make sure this information is present on the partner sites. I havent seen this happening, but then again if sites like network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so much if they dont show creative commons feed info? Its the opt-out ones that need to make sure they follow every letter of a license because they havent received rights explicitly granted to them by the video creators, they have to rely on the cc ones. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Kent Nichols" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We had our stuff removed last month and we're working through partners > to get them to realize that reencoding is not cool. > > -K > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "ryanne hodson" > <ryanne.hodson@> wrote: > > > > i also got a response from them saying what sull had said > > that they transcode so it's a more reliable playback experience... > > > > "Ryanne - I'll have your channel removed as soon as possible. Just > an FYI, > > I > > understand that transcoding and hosting is an issue, but we decided > to go > > ahead with it because it significantly improves the viewing > experience in a > > web environment. We track all viewing data (not just downloads) and > will be > > making it available to all publishers in the next week." > > > > > > > > > > On 4/14/07, Steve Garfield <steve@> wrote: > > > > > > I blogged about it here: > > > > > > http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/03/mike-hudacks-rules-for- > > > video-sharing.html > > > > > > or > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/2pvyg9 > > > > > > And posted their initial response: > > > > > > Update from Pyro.tv via Roxanne: > > > > > > "I understand the importance of tracking views and data. We will be > > > soon releasing a tool for publishers like yourself to get direct > > > visibility to your feed and titles performance through our service. I > > > will let you know when it is available. In the meantime, I'd be happy > > > to pass along any data we had already gathered (granted we have only > > > been public for a few days). > > > > > > I have passed your feedback to our product group and will be > > > implementing changes as soon as we can. If you visit the site you > > > should see that the pyro.tv watermark in the player has already been > > > removed. > > > > > > I am also recommending a clear link in the player area titled "Visit > > > this publisher's website" or something similar, among other changes > > > to provide clear information about the content owner and rights. > > > > > > Any additional feedback you can provide would be greatly > appreciated. " > > > > > > > > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:44 AM, Steve Garfield wrote: > > > > > > > Hey, > > > > A few of us contacted them last month and since then they have > > > > removed the branding from the video and added a link back to the > > > > website. > > > > > > > > They still don't link to the permalink of the post and they don't > > > > display the CC license that's embedded in my RSS feed. > > > > > > > > It's right in my feed: > > > > > > > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ > > > > > > > > --Steve > > > > > > > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 6:10 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote: > > > > > > > >> Blip's ads do not play through. > > > >> > > > >> That's a factor... > > > >> > > > >> Jan > > > >> > > > >> On 4/14/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage > <quirk@<quirk%40wreckandsalvage.com> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> In the gold rushes the people who got rich were the ones selling > > > >>> pans and > > > >>> shovels, not the panners. People who are out to make a buck on the > > > >>> back of > > > >>> another will always be able find a way to do that. I don't > > > >>> respect them, > > > >>> but I accept them. Like I accept the existence of bacteria in my > > > >>> intestine. I know it's living in there, serving some kind of > > > >>> purpose, I > > > >>> just usually avoid thinking about it. > > > >>> > > > >>> If they become larger, like a tapeworm say, and start causing > health > > > >>> problems, like stealing viewership and therefore ad revenue, then > > > >>> maybe > > > >>> it's > > > >>> time to call in the Quinacrine, or a lawyer. > > > >>> > > > >>> Drunken metaphoring, sorry if none of that made sense. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> -- > > > >>> Adam Quirk > > > >>> Wreck & Salvage > > > >>> 551.208.4644 > > > >>> Brooklyn, NY > > > >>> http://wreckandsalvage.com > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> The Faux Press - better than real > > > >> http://fauxpress.blogspot.com > > > >> http://twitter.com/fauxpress > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Steve Garfield > > > > http://SteveGarfield.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Steve Garfield > > > http://SteveGarfield.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th > > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA > > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen > > http://pixelodeonfest.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] > > >
