Sort of reminds me of the minefield we got into with the question of what is commercial in the context of creative commons licenses. Only this one has sharper teeth.
I mean obviously there are some cases which are pretty clear cut, especially if its established companies just trying to avoid costs of hosting video, but the grey area is still pretty large. Im slightly surprised and happy that we havent seen more video hosting sites vanish in the last 18 months, so I dont want to knock them for trying to focus and transition but its still going to be ugly at times, especially for people with sizeable archive of vids. It sure does feel like a long time ago that sites were falling overthemselves to attract almost every sort of content creator and the buzz that video was where the money will be seems long gone. If I ever build a successful web company (not likely), someone remind me to sell it quick before the fickle sands of the web shift. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In [email protected], Markus Sandy <markus.sa...@...> wrote: > > > On Oct 29, 2009, at 7:26 AM, Rupert Howe wrote: > > > Do you know what the issues are that people have with Vimeo TOS? > > > I'm aware of a case where video content was interviews with people who > are involved with various web-related projects. > > Videos we're identified by Vimeo as "commercial" due to some interview > subjects speaking about their company or product. > > Vimeo TOS says they are for non-commercial use only. > > Markus > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
