Copyright and YouTube
I have to wonder what the point is at this point...
I'm trying to watch clips of The Arcade Fire from Saturday Night Live a little while back because, well, I don't have a television so I couldn't watch it when it aired. But the clips on YouTube have been taken down, undoubtedly because someone who owns SNL sent a takedown notice to YouTube... and this is where I have to wonder what the point of it all is... this is a clip of a live performance, which is not for sale or anything, not ACCESSIBLE AT ALL. Because of this, there is nothing to be GAINED from holding back the clip from the public. I will admit that there might be nothing to be gained from allowing the clip to stand (although, perhaps it would make people inclined to watch SNL more if they enjoyed the fact that this band was on it and did such a good job!), however there is nothing to LOSE either because they're not trying to make a profit from this particular video.
In other words, they're just sitting on this video for no good reason. They are LOSING the faith of people by holding onto the clip because people like me will be frustrated that they're being pack-rat Nazis instead of sharing what they have with people who really care to take part in it.
It's at the point that copyright is no longer really a matter of protecting one's vested interest. It is a corporate bandwagon that no company seems to be able to see is actually bringing down the ship. Rather than censoring the bits and pieces of their "owned" videos (let's face it. Nobody owns images. Intellectual Property is an illusion), they should be sharing the wealth and worrying about their bottom line, and how they might be able to use this new technology to their advantage.
In My Opinion, by demanding the removal of the videos of The Arcade Fire's performance, Saturday Night Live (or whomever it's parent company is... Viacom?) is being impractical and childish.
I'm trying to watch clips of The Arcade Fire from Saturday Night Live a little while back because, well, I don't have a television so I couldn't watch it when it aired. But the clips on YouTube have been taken down, undoubtedly because someone who owns SNL sent a takedown notice to YouTube... and this is where I have to wonder what the point of it all is... this is a clip of a live performance, which is not for sale or anything, not ACCESSIBLE AT ALL. Because of this, there is nothing to be GAINED from holding back the clip from the public. I will admit that there might be nothing to be gained from allowing the clip to stand (although, perhaps it would make people inclined to watch SNL more if they enjoyed the fact that this band was on it and did such a good job!), however there is nothing to LOSE either because they're not trying to make a profit from this particular video.
In other words, they're just sitting on this video for no good reason. They are LOSING the faith of people by holding onto the clip because people like me will be frustrated that they're being pack-rat Nazis instead of sharing what they have with people who really care to take part in it.
It's at the point that copyright is no longer really a matter of protecting one's vested interest. It is a corporate bandwagon that no company seems to be able to see is actually bringing down the ship. Rather than censoring the bits and pieces of their "owned" videos (let's face it. Nobody owns images. Intellectual Property is an illusion), they should be sharing the wealth and worrying about their bottom line, and how they might be able to use this new technology to their advantage.
In My Opinion, by demanding the removal of the videos of The Arcade Fire's performance, Saturday Night Live (or whomever it's parent company is... Viacom?) is being impractical and childish.
posted by Sam @ 11:49 AM
<< Home