Google News suggests that there have been about 500 stories so far written in this news sources that they scan on the topic of Viacom’s 100,000 take-down notices to YouTube users. Most of the stories focus on the business dynamics of the matter, understandably: 1) why Viacom did this; 2) the possibility (or likelihood, or unlikelihood, depending upon whom you ask) of a license deal in the offing between the two entities; 3) the response from YouTube/Google to the take-downs; 4) the status of the enhanced tools for copyright owners who want to track their works that they believe to be illegally posted; and so forth.
A few possible Day 2 stories that have not been discussed extensively in the MSM coverage, and of greater interest to me:
– How many of the 100,000 notices were mis-fires, like the one to Jim Moore? A few hundred, a few thousand? (Is this person one of them?) And what is the impact of those mistakes? Is there any pushback against the copyright holder who made these mistakes? Any liability, say under DMCA Section 512(f)? (Top10Sources, with which I work, is seeking to aggregate these stories and links to the clips that are put back up so we can all judge for ourselves.)
– Does it matter under the law whether YouTube provides the enhanced copyright protection tools that are bandied about in many of these articles? Could they release them selectively, say to those who license with them and not to those who do not?
– Why isn’t Viacom doing what CBS has done, for instance (as a Forrester analyst is asking on Charlene Li’s blog)?
– Who will build a service to compete with YouTube? Will the policy for handling copyright matter, one way or another, in terms of customer adoption of competing services?
– Is there a copyright reform strategy, and/or one or a series of business ideas (like Lisensa, e.g., with which I am involved) or extensions to NGOs like Creative Commons, that can help address the copyright crisis that continues to rage on the web?
CBS is owned by Viacom, so… Viacom has already done that.
Sorry, Viacom and CBS officially split up in 2006, I just got the memo.
So the plot thickens…
Revver.com and dailymotion.com are two viral video websites that can potentially compete. Revver.com has already started paying ad dollars for original content, so that is probably what is going to push Youtube to do the same.
I bet Viacom is going to start hosting their content themselves. Otherwise why bother taking stuff down off of youtube (it probably helps them more than it hurts them).
Taking my videos down was definitely a misfire, but it isn’t particularly damaging. I was going to switch to revver anyway. Now it’s just sooner rather than later.
I think a day two research topic would be to look at the slant of the mainstream news stories versus the blogs…mainstream seems pro Viacom, blogs seem pro free culture and YouTube and Google. Not surprising, but stunning. Quantitative study would be nice.
[…] JP has everything you need to know to get caught up on Viacom’s C&D’s to YouTube. TopTenSources is aggregating stories about takedown misfires, whether outright errors or overreaching copyright claims. […]
[…] This is–to take up the title of a post by Professor John Palfrey–day 4 of the Viacom-Youtube saga. Viacom has retracted its copyright claim regarding Jim Moore’s home video. Three things will remain: […]