http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/9363926.html

Thousands of clips from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report reappeared on the video site Tuesday after being yanked over the weekend due to a copyright complaint from Viacom, Comedy Central's parent company.

Full episodes of the programs, on the other hand, were no longer available through the site.

Speculation about the reasoning for Viacom's decision to pull its programming focused on Google's acquisition of YouTube for $1.65 billion earlier this month.

Industry experts had predicted that the buyout would lead media companies to seek reimbursement for their pirated clips, rather than looking the other way, as had been the trend with regard to YouTube.

Comedy Central sells episodes of many of its top shows, including The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, for $1.99 a pop via Apple's iTunes Store.

In a statement Monday, Viacom clarified that it was trying to strike a balance between protecting its content and pleasing its audience.

"Like our peers in the media industry, we are focused on finding the right business model for professionally created content to be legally distributed on the Internet," the statement read.

"We want our audiences to be able to access our programming on every platform and we're interested in having it live on all forms of distribution in ways that protect our talented artists, our loyal customers and our passionate audiences."

The media conglomerate originally put YouTube on notice Friday, with a letter requesting that the site purge all Comedy Central content, as well as programming from VH1, MTV, BET and Nickelodeon.

After the site obligingly cleaned house, those who clicked on clips from the banned shows received the message: "This video has been removed due to terms of use violation."

Meanwhile, those who had uploaded clips from the show were warned that if they persisted in doing so, their YouTube accounts would be banned.

What Crap.  The best part about YouTube are the clips/shows from such networks, especially if we miss certain shows, we could always count on YouTube to watch them.  Basically, they are trying to run YouTube into the ground and make it so that the only clips you can upload on the damn site are home made.  I have absolutely no interest in watching a blog about some 14 year old girl's day at school or dates with her boyfriend.

But what irritates me the most (and a friend of mine brought up this point on his YouTube page) is that these networks air these shows of theirs on their FREE network. And the whole point for them is to get people to WATCH their TV shows.  So why are they being greedy and throwing fits whenever someone uploads clips for millions of others to watch?  Isn't that what the network wanted anyway, for people to get the chance to WATCH their programming?  Why does it matter to them whether they see it on their Network or on YouTube?  It just shows that these networks could care less about its viewers.

There are people in other countries who don't get networks such as MTV, VH1 or Comedy Central, and they are open to a whole new portal when getting to see their programming off of YouTube.  My friend on YouTube has uploaded the entire "I Love The" series from VH1 and plenty of people have thanked him because they don't get that programming in their country, and now they want to try and pry all of the programming from YouTube?  What good will that do them?  All it does is make them look like greedy scum.

There are some exceptions, sure, such as Paid Programming (like Howard Stern's material, which he has said he is upset that his clips are on YouTube) but when it comes to free networks that air these shows like 10 times a week, especially in repeats, why throw a fit when it shows up on a site like YouTube where MILLIONS of people can get to see your programming?

Pretty soon, YouTube probably won't even get to host Music Videos anymore, and then the site will be dead, mark my words  >:(

But what irritates me the most (and a friend of mine brought up this point on his YouTube page) is that these networks air these shows of theirs on their FREE network. And the whole point for them is to get people to WATCH their TV shows.  So why are they being greedy and throwing fits whenever someone uploads clips for millions of others to watch?  Isn't that what the network wanted anyway, for people to get the chance to WATCH their programming?  Why does it matter to them whether they see it on their Network or on YouTube?  It just shows that these networks could care less about its viewers.


But even though they don't charge people to watch their programming on free TV channels, those channels still show advertisements during their programmes, which is, of course, how they make money. If people are watching shows on Youtube instead, they probably won't be watching the ads for the shows, which will result in lower revenues for the programmers.

And also, people watching shows on Youtube won't show up in the TV ratings, which is what the advertising premiums that are charged by the networks are based on.

does that mean if we have added copyrighted videos to our favorites list, they will be deleted?? I knew this merger was going to be trouble!!

WKM82 asked why they are being greedy.  They are being greedy because greed is the sole motivation of the corporate world.  Period.

I used YouTube almost exclusively to watch old music videos from the '80s.  Once I had watched all the old music videos I wanted to see, my interest in the site waned.  I had just recently begain to search YouTube to get clips of political speeches and stuff like that.

I would not mind paying a nominal fee for watching an old Duran Duran video if it was as easy as dropping a quarter into a slot.  The trouble is, all online financial transactions are a pain in the wazoo.  You have to set up your account.  You have to fill out a stupid profile to insure your info matches your cc#.  You have to get your wallet.  You have to enter eighteen digits in sequence.  And if you make a mistake, you have to start all over again!  It isn't like a jukebox where you just fed it coins and pushed the buttons.  I don't need to see the video for "Space Age Love Song" that bad!  Those old videos have little commercial value decades later.  VH1 might show these clips on an '80s count down or best of special once a year, maybe once every two years!  I think it should fall under fair use at that point.  I don't watch VH1 because none of the music I listen to now would ever be on there.  VH1 is not going to broadcast the California Ear Unit performing Morton Feldman, it's just not going to happen!  All the music videos for songs I like were made when I listened to pop music over 15 years ago!

I haven't heard anybody talk about pay-per view.  There was some discussion of commercials.  On principle, I'm will not sit through a Pepsi ad so I can watch the Psychedelic Furs from 1982!

Satish makes a good point about commercial advertisers funding television.  If you can download the "Daily Show" without the commercials, Viacom sees it like you sneaking into a cinema through the emergency exit!  I don't really think YouTube posed a big threat to the profitability of commercial media, but to the media barons and their armies of lawyers any threat is too big.

YouTube got big and profitable and went corporate.  It's success sowed the seeds of its demise.  Is there anything that says enterprising individuals with cyber savvy can't learn from YouTube's mistakes.  Start another YouTube-type site that isn't worth billions and keep the operation small.  If it gets too big, break it up again.  If the Viacom lawyers come after you, elude them.  I don't have the technical prowess to be one of these Internet Robin Hoods, but those who do have it must use it!

I don't like the idea of artists losing royalties, but that's a tiny prt of what's at stake here.  I am for freedom of information.  I am for keeping the Internet as "wild west" as possible.  The journalism and news business has been swallowed up by the entertainment industry and the defense industry.  We cannot let Disney and General Electric filter every bit of information we can access.  Yes, I am in favor of stealing corporate "intellectual property."

WKM82 asked why they are being greedy.  They are being greedy because greed is the sole motivation of the corporate world.  Period.

I used YouTube almost exclusively to watch old music videos from the '80s.  Once I had watched all the old music videos I wanted to see, my interest in the site waned.  I had just recently begain to search YouTube to get clips of political speeches and stuff like that.

I would not mind paying a nominal fee for watching an old Duran Duran video if it was as easy as dropping a quarter into a slot.  The trouble is, all online financial transactions are a pain in the wazoo.  You have to set up your account.  You have to fill out a stupid profile to insure your info matches your cc#.  You have to get your wallet.  You have to enter eighteen digits in sequence.  And if you make a mistake, you have to start all over again!  It isn't like a jukebox where you just fed it coins and pushed the buttons.  I don't need to see the video for "Space Age Love Song" that bad!  Those old videos have little commercial value decades later.  VH1 might show these clips on an '80s count down or best of special once a year, maybe once every two years!  I think it should fall under fair use at that point.  I don't watch VH1 because none of the music I listen to now would ever be on there.  VH1 is not going to broadcast the California Ear Unit performing Morton Feldman, it's just not going to happen!  All the music videos for songs I like were made when I listened to pop music over 15 years ago!

I haven't heard anybody talk about pay-per view.  There was some discussion of commercials.  On principle, I'm will not sit through a Pepsi ad so I can watch the Psychedelic Furs from 1982!

Satish makes a good point about commercial advertisers funding television.  If you can download the "Daily Show" without the commercials, Viacom sees it like you sneaking into a cinema through the emergency exit!  I don't really think YouTube posed a big threat to the profitability of commercial media, but to the media barons and their armies of lawyers any threat is too big.

YouTube got big and profitable and went corporate.  It's success sowed the seeds of its demise.  Is there anything that says enterprising individuals with cyber savvy can't learn from YouTube's mistakes.  Start another YouTube-type site that isn't worth billions and keep the operation small.  If it gets too big, break it up again.  If the Viacom lawyers come after you, elude them.  I don't have the technical prowess to be one of these Internet Robin Hoods, but those who do have it must use it!

I don't like the idea of artists losing royalties, but that's a tiny prt of what's at stake here.  I am for freedom of information.  I am for keeping the Internet as "wild west" as possible.  The journalism and news business has been swallowed up by the entertainment industry and the defense industry.  We cannot let Disney and General Electric filter every bit of information we can access.  Yes, I am in favor of stealing corporate "intellectual property."


The artists are getting screwed way more by the record companies than by people watching some advertising free music videos. Corporate greed is at work again.

does that mean if we have added copyrighted videos to our favorites list, they will be deleted?? I knew this merger was going to be trouble!!


They delete them as they can, they'll never wipe everything out. Mostly it's the most popular videos which they delete.

They delete them as they can, they'll never wipe everything out. Mostly it's the most popular videos which they delete.

oh good, so maybe my 70's bands/80's hair bands/ funny videos/ political folders will remain intact

The artists are getting screwed way more by the record companies than by people watching some advertising free music videos. Corporate greed is at work again.

Amen.  They've got one team of corprate lawyers making sure you can't enjoy your favorite band for free, and another team of corporate lawyers screwing the band out their fair nickel when you buy their CD!  So to hell with the corporate media!  Fuggem!

I'm waiting for the scare tactics, like they used with Napster, you know, when they go after individuals who download from YouTube!  I remember when the cops busted that 14-year-old girl for making Sesame Street CD-Rs for her little brother via Napster!  What if I'm watching that Planet P Project video and the cyber cops kick in my front door.  "Aha! We caught you red-handed! You're looking five years in prison and a million dollar fine, buddy!"
:D


oh good, so maybe my 70's bands/80's hair bands/ funny videos/ political folders will remain intact

Just what I was thinking!
http://www.80smusiclyrics.com/images/afos.jpg

Maxwell Smart, do you like Maxwell's Silver Hammer?

youtube was way too good to last. you could get all sorts of copyrighted material, completely free of charge! the holders of the property rights for those shows have every right to exert their interest in keeping them from being broadcast around. on the other hand, i sure liked it when you could watch whatever the heck you wanted, whenever. that was awesome.

youtube was way too good to last. you could get all sorts of copyrighted material, completely free of charge! the holders of the property rights for those shows have every right to exert their interest in keeping them from being broadcast around. on the other hand, i sure liked it when you could watch whatever the heck you wanted, whenever. that was awesome.


It's not dead, they've got agreements with numerous record companies to make just about every music video available eventually I've read. There will be ads of course probably, but least the we'll still have the music videos.

I like going to YouTube and watching old music videos from the 80s.  I hope they don't take those away.  There's really no where you can go to see old 80s videos.  These music channels (MTV, Much Music, etc ...) persist on playing today's crappy Top 40 music, rather than the good classic stuff I grew up on, so if it wasn't for YouTube, i'd never get my 80s fix

I like going to YouTube and watching old music videos from the 80s.  I hope they don't take those away.  There's really no where you can go to see old 80s videos.  These music channels (MTV, Much Music, etc ...) persist on playing today's crappy Top 40 music, rather than the good classic stuff I grew up on, so if it wasn't for YouTube, i'd never get my 80s fix


They haven't been deleting the old videos, it's the new ones like "Fergalicious" that they're targeting.

It's not dead, they've got agreements with numerous record companies to make just about every music video available eventually I've read. There will be ads of course probably, but least the we'll still have the music videos.
well, it's not dead but i don't think it'll be the phenomenon it was. there'll still be interesting stuff on it but the appeal was that it was a total free-for-all.

I knew once anyone 40 and over caught wind of it, the demise was likely to follow!

Honestly, I really saw this coming. I just couldn't see how all that copyrighted intellectual property could continue being distributed for free without a crackdown. It wasn't a question of if, but when.

Anyway, I don't use Youtube that much to begin with, since my computer equipment and connection speed aren't really enough to handle large audio and video downloads.

It's not dead, they've got agreements with numerous record companies to make just about every music video available eventually I've read. There will be ads of course probably, but least the we'll still have the music videos.

It depends on how the commercials are presented and if you're able to choose the music videos you please.  Some webcast services won't let the transmission start until a commercial runs its cours in that window.  I don't like that idea.

I hope YouTube isn't removed from the Internet too soon. I love it and it's even better than www.stupidvideos.com.

YouTube is far from dying, it has been boosted with loads of tv archive footage.

i thought it was gonna die too but it seems to be going ok for the most part.

I saw this thread, and was like WTF, WalkMan is back? LOL

YouTube probably won't ever die, but as far as watching classic TV, music videos and other copyrighted material, the faster you put it on there, the faster it gets removed :(

Anytime I see classic TV footage I usually watch it right away, because it might not be there tomorrow.  :(

I think Google had just acquired YouTube right around the time this topic was started, and I remember that alot of classic music videos and tv show clips started being deleted around this time as well.

They still don't have as many of the older tv clips and shows as they did before everybody started catching on, but I am happy they didn't delete all the old stuff, like I was afraid they were going to.

I think Google had just acquired YouTube right around the time this topic was started, and I remember that alot of classic music videos and tv show clips started being deleted around this time as well.

They still don't have as many of the older tv clips and shows as they did before everybody started catching on, but I am happy they didn't delete all the old stuff, like I was afraid they were going to.


Any better sites that aren't YouTube?

BTW-I really dislike Viacom. They think they can own everything and dictate our freedom to watch Computer TV Shows! This is why I call Viacom 'Engulf+Devour'.

Dang it! And I just got broadband! :-\\  This was one of the reasons why I've been pushing to upgrade from Dial Up. Last night I was watching 21 year old clips from a weird show I liked called the Charmings after all these years.

Dang it! And I just got broadband! :-\\  This was one of the reasons why I've been pushing to upgrade from Dial Up. Last night I was watching 21 year old clips from a weird show I liked called the Charmings after all these years.


Oh I LOVED the Charmings!  I'd forgotten about that show.  Now I have to go seek them out.