Print 12 comment(s) - last by msimic.. on Jan 3 at 7:16 PM

Google rings in the new year without its promised anti-piracy protection scheme

Although YouTube rang in 2007 with a virtual New Year's Eve festival complete with a performance from Warner Music, live performances and participation from hordes of online members, the company failed to meet its self-imposed deadline to implement anti-piracy protection on its site. In an agreement with Warner Music Group, YouTube promised in September to have an anti-piracy system in place that would feature an "advanced content identification and royalty reporting system."

The anti-piracy system to be in place by the end of 2006 was a part of a deal which allowed Google to distribute Warner music videos, artist interviews and other music-related content. When Google acquired YouTube for $1.65 billion USD in October, it was widely expected that Google's deeper pockets would give YouTube the financial backing to implement such anti-piracy measures.

Missing the year-end deadline could be seen as a virtual pothole on the road to a more controlled distribution channel, but YouTube still can save face by getting the system live within the opening weeks of 2007. "It is hugely important, especially from the rights holders' perspective, that the best efforts are being made to corral the stuff flowing through YouTube," said Michael McGuire of Gartner Research. "Rights holders are making specific bets on paths of distribution and are expecting serious effort to make uncontrolled distribution difficult for most folks to do."

For now, YouTube is leaving the ball in the user's court when it comes to copyrighted music by telling users that uploading content "shall be at your sole risk."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Beckett on 1/2/07, Rating: 0
By Aikouka on 1/2/2007 3:56:46 PM , Rating: 4
Well, some people may enjoy that spectrum of content, but I don't think that's all that YouTube caters to. I know I haven't personally visited YouTube for any of the reasons you mentioned above, but I tend to receive links from friends or in chat rooms to various home-made movies/spoofs, which are perfectly legit.

There will never be an end to the amount of people that will want to make themselves look like an ass in front of millions of people :).

By hondaman on 1/2/07, Rating: -1
By sceptus on 1/2/2007 7:45:41 PM , Rating: 3
I realize that copyrighted videos are a big part of Youtube, but I think that the true gems of Youtube are videos made by the actual members of the community, and viewings of these make up most of the activity.

By ScythedBlade on 1/2/07, Rating: 0
By cochy on 1/2/2007 10:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
Of course they are losing money. Networks pay big money to bring television shows to you. If you circumvent them and watch a show on YouTube you are lowering their ratings which translates into lost revenue from advertisers. You are also wrong to say that shows are "public" since they are certainly not. You are allowed to tape a show for your own private use. Uploading a tv show to YouTube is about as far from private use and can be possible on this planet.

In conclusion, it was wrong for the creators of YouTube to profit so handsomely while at the same time leveraging off illegal use (even thought they didn't themselves upload) of copyrighted materials, which is what made YouTube so popular. Google should pay for this. I am surprised the copyright holders have been so lenient with them so far.

By hubajube on 1/3/2007 7:06:02 PM , Rating: 3
I am surprised the copyright holders have been so lenient with them so far.
No lieniecy needed. They're all multi-billion dollar corps and as such like to help each other make even more money and market share. The media corps see a money maker in YouTube which has MUCH higher viewership than regular TV. It's when the old farts in the media can't make money is where the problems arise.

By marvdmartian on 1/3/2007 9:27:40 AM , Rating: 2
Well, just call me a minority then, since I won't waste my time on either one of those shows.

Hey, since I'm a minority now, does that mean I qualify for more goodies from the government?? ;)

Probably done...
By Aikouka on 1/2/2007 2:23:45 PM , Rating: 5
... but, just like most Google products, stuck in Beta.

RE: Probably done...
By S3anister on 1/2/2007 3:07:16 PM , Rating: 2
LOL true that.

How long was the google toolbar in beta for?

RE: Probably done...
By achintya on 1/3/2007 3:05:52 AM , Rating: 2
Google itself should be renamed to "Google Beta" in accordance with most of its products and services :D.

On a more serious note, look at Gmail, Orkut, YouTube, Google Talk etc.. All stuck in Beta..

RE: Probably done...
By msimic on 1/3/2007 7:16:10 PM , Rating: 2
Well, they are the opposite of Microsoft :)
They prolong the beta fase insanely while MS puts the "XP" tag for something that is beta as soon as it can boot :D

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki