Comments on: Guardian column: YouTube is good for TV http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/ by Jeff Jarvis Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:26:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Tout Voyance http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-373876 Tout Voyance Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:47:24 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-373876 <strong>L'influence des pierres précieuses et l'astrologie....</strong> Il est bien connu qu'à l'époque du premier christianisme plusieurs ?uvres d'auteurs anciens sur l'influence des pierres sur la santé et le destin de l'homme ont disparu (l'église croyait que c'étaient les résultats de la superstition païe... L’influence des pierres précieuses et l’astrologie….

Il est bien connu qu’à l’époque du premier christianisme plusieurs ?uvres d’auteurs anciens sur l’influence des pierres sur la santé et le destin de l’homme ont disparu (l’église croyait que c’étaient les résultats de la superstition païe…

]]> By: 注册公司 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-354879 注册公司 Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:15:41 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-354879 good morning. good morning.

]]> By: Bren Flibig http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-349596 Bren Flibig Fri, 11 May 2007 04:14:18 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-349596 I find it amusing (in a sick way) that so many people who eloquently argue against copyright find themselves apologizing for it in a sort of backwards defensive fashion, and that they so rarely address the fact that the notion of copyright is changing radically for the worse in the legal world even as it changes for the better in the world of actual experience. I would venture to suggest that a good time for copyright to expire in the new world is as soon as the copyrighted item is allowed to go out of print. If it isn't worth selling anymore, it doesn't deserve copyright protection, and ought to be allowed to become a part of public culture. Note that this would mean that Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" and Van Morrison's "Astral Weeks" would still be under copyright, while most disposable pop would not. It would require media distribution companies to behave in a more rational manner in protecting their propertie. It would also require that popular media producers invest in their own retirement the same the way the rest of the working world has to, which would be a good thing for increasing their general responsibility, and automatically filtering much stupidity out of popular culture. I find it amusing (in a sick way) that so many people who eloquently argue against copyright find themselves apologizing for it in a sort of backwards defensive fashion, and that they so rarely address the fact that the notion of copyright is changing radically for the worse in the legal world even as it changes for the better in the world of actual experience.

I would venture to suggest that a good time for copyright to expire in the new world is as soon as the copyrighted item is allowed to go out of print. If it isn’t worth selling anymore, it doesn’t deserve copyright protection, and ought to be allowed to become a part of public culture.

Note that this would mean that Pink Floyd’s “Dark Side of the Moon” and Van Morrison’s “Astral Weeks” would still be under copyright, while most disposable pop would not. It would require media distribution companies to behave in a more rational manner in protecting their propertie. It would also require that popular media producers invest in their own retirement the same the way the rest of the working world has to, which would be a good thing for increasing their general responsibility, and automatically filtering much stupidity out of popular culture.

]]> By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Who needs MSM? http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-343860 BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Who needs MSM? Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:23:48 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-343860 [...] shares Hitwise’s report that traffic on YouTube surges even after Viacom pulled its precious content: “According to research from the fine folks at Hitwise, YouTube visits [...] [...] shares Hitwise’s report that traffic on YouTube surges even after Viacom pulled its precious content: “According to research from the fine folks at Hitwise, YouTube visits [...]

]]> By: » Der Unterschied zwischen YouTube und Joost » sunblogger - notizen aus einer norddeutschen werbeagentur http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-340626 » Der Unterschied zwischen YouTube und Joost » sunblogger - notizen aus einer norddeutschen werbeagentur Wed, 21 Feb 2007 16:03:00 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-340626 [...] Joost wird sicherlich seine Nutzerschaft finden. Ob die aber im Bereich von hunderten Millionen Nutzern pro Tag liegt ist mehr als fraglich. Die Erfahrung mit den Marktanteilen der verschiedenen Mediaplayern zeigt, daß sich der Markt meist auf eine Handvoll Lösungen konsolidiert. Erinnert sich heute noch jemand an den Real Player? Ich prophezeie ähnliches für Joost. Trotz MTV & South Park-Videos ;) Sehr zu empfehlen ist in diesem Zusammenhang die Kolumne von Guardian-Kolumnist Jeff Davis. Take Viacom. The American media giant - owner of MTV, Comedy Central, iFilm, Paramount, and much more - followed the old rules this month when it demanded that YouTube take down 100,000 clips that viewers had put up there. Mind you, Viacom was quite within its rights, for it controls the copyright to that content. And as a content creator myself, I’m no foe of copyright. It’s also clear that this is a negotiating move on Viacom’s part. [...] [...] Joost wird sicherlich seine Nutzerschaft finden. Ob die aber im Bereich von hunderten Millionen Nutzern pro Tag liegt ist mehr als fraglich. Die Erfahrung mit den Marktanteilen der verschiedenen Mediaplayern zeigt, daß sich der Markt meist auf eine Handvoll Lösungen konsolidiert. Erinnert sich heute noch jemand an den Real Player? Ich prophezeie ähnliches für Joost. Trotz MTV & South Park-Videos ;) Sehr zu empfehlen ist in diesem Zusammenhang die Kolumne von Guardian-Kolumnist Jeff Davis. Take Viacom. The American media giant - owner of MTV, Comedy Central, iFilm, Paramount, and much more - followed the old rules this month when it demanded that YouTube take down 100,000 clips that viewers had put up there. Mind you, Viacom was quite within its rights, for it controls the copyright to that content. And as a content creator myself, I’m no foe of copyright. It’s also clear that this is a negotiating move on Viacom’s part. [...]

]]> By: robhyndman.com » Blog Archive » Just Joost for Viacom http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-339247 robhyndman.com » Blog Archive » Just Joost for Viacom Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:44:13 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-339247 [...] Marshall Kirkpatrick worries about end of YouTube’s monopoly (an angle that Scott Karp wrote about recently) - “It would be a real loss to the world if the two tiers of creativity, professional and user generated, were forever bifurcated in different distribution channels … The emergence of viable online alternatives like Joost could spell trouble for any hopes that we will soon be able to watch Beavis & Butthead and Chad Vader all in one convenient location.” - a sentiment that Jeff Jarvis seemed to echo a few days ago. [...] [...] Marshall Kirkpatrick worries about end of YouTube’s monopoly (an angle that Scott Karp wrote about recently) - “It would be a real loss to the world if the two tiers of creativity, professional and user generated, were forever bifurcated in different distribution channels … The emergence of viable online alternatives like Joost could spell trouble for any hopes that we will soon be able to watch Beavis & Butthead and Chad Vader all in one convenient location.” - a sentiment that Jeff Jarvis seemed to echo a few days ago. [...]

]]> By: GigaOM » MTV is Poised for a Comeback http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-339027 GigaOM » MTV is Poised for a Comeback Tue, 20 Feb 2007 15:07:57 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-339027 [...] As only he can, Jeff Jarvis eloquently summarizes the general consensus in his latest Guardian column, echoing the prevailing sentiment that Viacom’s move against YouTube represents yet another ill-fated attempt by the old media guard to regain command & control in the ever-elusive new media world. [...] [...] As only he can, Jeff Jarvis eloquently summarizes the general consensus in his latest Guardian column, echoing the prevailing sentiment that Viacom’s move against YouTube represents yet another ill-fated attempt by the old media guard to regain command & control in the ever-elusive new media world. [...]

]]> By: John Dodds http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-337839 John Dodds Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:47:26 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2007/02/19/guardian-column-youtube-is-good-for-tv/#comment-337839 Leaving aside my doubt that anyone would be converted to the great Jon Stewart on the basis of one of his worst interviews, the question remains how did your son discover the clip? He presumably did a search for Bill Gates - and I'm guessing from your description that he did so on YouTube, but he could equally well have done so on Google and discovered the interview that way. Of course, media owners have to adapt to the new world but, as long as search engines exist, then isn't it entirely feasible for copyright owners to prevent the third-party exploitation of their material for commercial gain and still reap the benefits of giving away content? Leaving aside my doubt that anyone would be converted to the great Jon Stewart on the basis of one of his worst interviews, the question remains how did your son discover the clip? He presumably did a search for Bill Gates - and I’m guessing from your description that he did so on YouTube, but he could equally well have done so on Google and discovered the interview that way.

Of course, media owners have to adapt to the new world but, as long as search engines exist, then isn’t it entirely feasible for copyright owners to prevent the third-party exploitation of their material for commercial gain and still reap the benefits of giving away content?

]]>