The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: narzo on December 03, 2014, 05:44:26 AM
-
just had my first "Gong Show" video blocked worldwide by "BBTV_SonyPictures" on youtube and most of the others (not all) have a "matched, third party content" warning on them.
I decided to do a quick google of "BBTV_SonyPictures" (with quotes) and it's amazing how the results are all youtube pages with saying exactly what my warning did, content blocked worldwide, blah blah blah...
Just hide them all now, to save my page? Keep them up?
-
Take 'em down...ain't worth losing your account over it.
-
Take 'em down...ain't worth losing your account over it.
This. A thousand times this. You do not own those videos, and if the people who do tell you to take them down, you take them down. This could not be a simpler concept.
-
yeah, you're right, my youtube page is now far less interesting.
I guess my confusion lies in why weren't they all taken down? Only one was, then several with a vague warning attached, then others had no action at all?
It's a shame too, I had a number of the performers in those clips contact me over the years to say "thank you" for posting it. Some hadn't seen them since they first ran.
At least I don't have to worry about someone demanding I take down "Tele-Quest", I don't think anyone would want to claim ownership of that.
-
That reply is proof that it's a simple concept, but yet people don't understand it even when they are presented direct evidence of it.
You do not own it. You dodged bullets on the others that you don't own either.
-
Maybe I'm missing something or am unfamiliar with YouTube policies but if he gets his account shut down what's the big deal? I'm fully aware the content is not his to distribute but it seems pretty easy to register on Google and their related services.
-
Maybe I'm missing something or am unfamiliar with YouTube policies but if he gets his account shut down what's the big deal?
The entitlement in this statement is absolutely off the charts.
-
That reply is proof that it's a simple concept, but yet people don't understand it even when they are presented direct evidence of it.
You do not own it. You dodged bullets on the others that you don't own either.
What he said. And there's no guarantees they won't come for the rest either. You gotta know that.
Hell, I've been guilty of it as well. Not to the point where I used episodes of things but I have used music clips and such as part of my soundtracks for my vids. And I'm a wannabe Unterganger, so there's that.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
I'll see the entitlement in Mark's statement, and raise you this.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
Entertainment isn't life. It's optional. It's not a right. Stop treating it like it is.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube
Yes, I absolutely do. Because it's THEIR GODDAMN CONTENT.
Jesus Christ, Zach, go outside.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube
Jesus Christ, Zach, go outside.
Shut up. You will not dictate how I live my life.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
Some guys in Ferguson, MO and New York City want you to get your freakin' priorities in order.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
I find it fair that a company that creates or owns a thing is allowed to curate that thing. That's the basis of intellectual property, and apparently this is a thing you don't understand because you keep banging this drum to no effect.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
Your other statement, while wrong-headed and entitled and childish is at least defensible because it's your own position. This on the other hand represents all of the reasons why you are treated the way you are on this board.
And upon further review: Mrr.
-
Shut up. You will not dictate me and my life.
Absolutely true. You'd have to have one first.
Seriously, though, I utterly fail to see how you can not understand the very basic concept of "it's not your content" and succeed in cleansing yourself of your own filth at the same time.
-
Maybe I'm missing something or am unfamiliar with YouTube policies but if he gets his account shut down what's the big deal?
The entitlement in this statement is absolutely off the charts.
How the hell am I "entitled'? I was simply querying if YouTube has some kind of policy that actually blocks people from starting a new account and simply uploading the videos again. Because I'm sure its happened before.
-
Shut up. You will not dictate how I live my life.
How long have you been an English speaker? Most people get that things like "get a life" are meant as idioms and not directives (though in this case I do fully stand behind Chris in that assessment.)
If you want to be treated better, then you might start with speaking more respectfully and not flying off the handle every time somebody addresses you directly.
Respectively.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
God forbid a company would want to make money and hold on to the intellectual and property rights to their property. I mean, it's not like they're trying to make money anything; they'll just say, "Okay, go ahead, you have this and keep it online, no restrictions! We don't need this money anyway, it's not like our shareholders will care about this at all."
Honestly, though, every time I think you can't stoop lower than you do about property rights of companies keeping their own material, you do. It's no surprise, but the manner in which you do so reeks of ignorance with respect to how and why companies exist. They do not exist to please you. They exist to help increase shareholder profits. If what a company does, creates, etc. pleases you, that is just an additional bonus.
How many times has the Forum explained these concepts to you? Don't answer that. By extension, it's the same number as times your promulgations have been filled with petulant puling.
/A person shouldn't be this pale, Zach
//Hor today, an' gone tomorrow
-
...YouTube has some kind of policy that actually blocks people from starting a new account and simply uploading the videos again. Because I'm sure its happened before.
They don't, and people have done it.
-
They don't, and people have done it.
...and thinking that circumventing being actively disinvited from their service is "no big deal" is...well, I would have said "as entitled as it gets," but then Zach managed to top it when he evacuated his mental bowels.
/yes, your name is Zach now
-
Shut up. You will not dictate how I live my life.
I made this into a Famous Quote poster for my office (http://i.imgur.com/PqERUGU.jpg). You're free to use it as you wish.
-
I might make it into a desk sign.
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
What in the world are you talking about? Copyright violation is copyright violation. Yes it sucks when someone gets zapped, but that's life. This whole "woe is me" attitude is a farce.
Check your privilege, then check your attitude.
/You owe Lemon an apology
-
/You owe Lemon an apology
Did you mean "society"?
-
/You owe Lemon an apology
He owes me nothing. I don't even want him to be in my debt.
-
/You owe Lemon an apology
Did you mean "society"?
Oh I stopped expecting that a while ago :-P
-
I wonder if the people here defending Sony's actions find it fair when a company will not allow people here America to view their videos on YouTube, or another site similar to it, like Dailymotion.
If you find it fair, and don't think these companies are treating people here in America like animals, I feel bad for you.
No. I feel bad for you that you think this. I feel bad for you because with a mentality like that you will never make money.
Also, can you please stop with the drastic overstatement? "Like animals"? Really? Are you paying attention to the the news?
But let's end this post on a light note. (http://i.imgur.com/HVmoCf2.gifv)
-
/You owe Lemon an apology
He owes me nothing. I don't even want him to be in my debt.
That was more a riff on his BTS post from last week. Point taken. :-)
-
As much as I'd hate to see the videos go, at the end of the day, they own the content, they hold the copyrights to it. So it's best to do as they say.
-
No, Kevin Prather. I will not leave this forum permanently. I am staying right here.
Oh Vahalla Nasarocketship! You always know how to crack me up. Thanks, buddy!
In an effort to give some tangible advice in regards to the illicit Youtube videos, yank 'em. They were fun while they lasted, but in reality they aren't yours. In the end you get to keep your Google account and you don't have to deal with the aforementioned buffoon whining at you about airdates to your Youtube videos. Win/win!
-
In an effort to give some tangible advice in regards to the illicit Youtube videos, yank 'em. They were fun while they lasted, but in reality they aren't yours. In the end you get to keep your Google account and you don't have to deal with the aforementioned buffoon whining at you about airdates to your Youtube videos. Win/win!
Yes, Vahan, take them down. It isn't worth the headache. Plus you'll feel better for doing the right thing. Just think, this could be the first step toward you turning a new leaf and conducting yourself in a matter more in line with this board.
-
No, Kevin Prather. I will not leave this forum permanently. I am staying right here.
There are exactly three people who are in a position to make this decision. Kevin Prather and Vahan Nisanian are not among them.
-
You people are acting like a bunch of TPIR fans. I've deleted a page worth of claptrap here.
It's the frickin Gong Show. At the end of the day, Sony owns the copyright. Sony has already had your content blocked. What you do from here is between you and YouTube.
Whatever happened to the video where the guy went ballistic because Stan played a TPIR losing cue that he didn't like?
-
Whatever happened to the video where the guy went ballistic because Stan played a TPIR losing cue that he didn't like?
Deleted by the author. All that's left is a screencap of thumbnails for posterity:
(http://i.imgur.com/m208J.png)
-
Oh my goodness that is a red face...
-
Brett down there has the right idea.
-
Was that the same guy who referred to the losing horns as the "fail fanfare?"
-
Brett down there has the right idea.
Trolling is the next milestone for a Turing Test.
-
Somebody musta been a fan of Replay Converter.
Folks, this is why I don't videotape myself and upload it to YouTube. Because without makeup, I'm that scary looking. If not worse.
-
Hey, I can wax sanctimonious as much as anyone about theft of intellectual property, respecting copyright, etc.
But that would make me a hypocrite. Why? Because I've done my share (not that much, admittedly) of uploading onto YouTube stuff that waren't mine.
And what's more, I don't hesitate to watch YouTube videos of material where copyright has obviously been breached. (I chuckle whenever someone uploads something, then says in the description, "I own nothing" or "No copyright infringement intended," like that's going to give them immunity.)
In short, I regard copyright the way I do traffic laws - I'm officially in favor of obeying them, but have been known to break them "accidentally on purpose" from time to time. If caught, I own up - but that doesn't stop me from making "exceptions" now and again. And, to be honest, I don't expect to stop anytime soon.
So sue me. (You, not the copyright holder - they might actually have a case.)
-
But that would make me a hypocrite. Why? Because I've done my share (not that much, admittedly) of uploading onto YouTube stuff that waren't mine.
Ah, but herein lies the difference: you are at least aware that what you are doing is in violation of YouTube's TOS and choose to take the risk anyhow. (I almost said "is wrong," but the entire point of this is that it's flat against YouTube's rules without making a judgment one way or the other as to the moral issues.) We have people in this thread who can't even get THAT through their thick skulls.
And what's more, I don't hesitate to watch YouTube videos of material where copyright has obviously been breached.
I fail to see anything wrong with this, ever. (At least with regard to YouTube.) It's not on the viewer to have to know is what they are seeing is there legally or not. It's about the uploaders.
-
However risky or illegal it may be, I always appreciate the effort put forth by the uploaders. I love finding an obscurity from my childhood, or something I've only read about and never expecting in a million years.
That said, I realize that when it's gone, it's gone. If only more people took that approach.
-
However risky or illegal it may be, I always appreciate the effort put forth by the uploaders. I love finding an obscurity from my childhood, or something I've only read about and never expecting in a million years.
That said, I realize that when it's gone, it's gone. If only more people took that approach.
Well said. YouTube is definitely the place to find all that and more. Although I wish that one of my favorite WoF clips (a Christmas episode with the puzzle "SLEIGH BELLS RING ARE YOU LIST'NIN'") was still up as I enjoy watching it each year, but alas, it's gone.
-
That said, I realize that when it's gone, it's gone. If only more people took that approach.
Monty Hall will come out of retirement full time to replace Wayne Brady on LMAD before that happens, sadly.
-
BBTV (BroadbandTV Corp) is a 3rd Party whose business model is largely "Hey, you, media companies! You guys own all this stuff but don't have the time or interest to monetize your own content or to track down *others* using your intellectual property? Tell us what you own, and pay us, and we'll take care of it. Companies (Sony and Fremantle both are clients) pay them, and tell them what they'd specifically like done, and BBTV makes it happen.
In some cases that means monetizing the videos themselves - the video stays up, Sony gets a royalty check, and BBTV makes cash on the side. In other cases, that means the videos coming down entirely leaving the original IP holder free to pursue their own monetization and distribution. The only things, from my own experiences early this year, where the "take it down entirely" concept came into play was with full episodes of Wheel and Jeopardy. In virtually every other case, the rightsholders have left the videos up, and simply chosen to monetize it themselves.
And really, think about it. They get to sit back, let us as game show fans continue to share the content we're passionate about (within reason), and in exchange they get to serve ads and collect the royalty money. We get the content, they get the money. It's as close to an "everyone wins" scenario as you can get in this situation. No, you can't upload 1,342 episodes of Wheel of Fortune. But got an awesome clip, or maybe an old 80s episode, or you were a contestant? Go for it. Want to share episodes and clips from the harder-to-monetize back catalog (hello, Gong Show)? By all means.
Unless the notices came concurrent with a takedown (which, as I've said, has been the exception rather than the rule), your video stays live, you still get to share it. They just get the cash. If you upload their content, you've infringed on their copyrights. Heck, i used to do it extensively too. and knew damn well what I was doing. And when Sony/Fremantle brought in BBTV to actively use their IP? Enjoy your money, you guys. It's their content ("Fair Use" my ass" - anyone who claims that needs to be punched), if they want to make money off of our passion for their shows, more power to them.
-
Ironic that YouTube monetizes some of the copyright-infringing videos with a commercial prior to people being able to see them.
-
Ironic that YouTube monetizes some of the copyright-infringing videos with a commercial prior to people being able to see them.
Where do you think that money goes, most of the time?
-
BBTV (BroadbandTV Corp) is a 3rd Party whose business model is largely "Hey, you, media companies! You guys own all this stuff but don't have the time or interest to monetize your own content or to track down *others* using your intellectual property? Tell us what you own, and pay us, and we'll take care of it. Companies (Sony and Fremantle both are clients) pay them, and tell them what they'd specifically like done, and BBTV makes it happen.
In some cases that means monetizing the videos themselves - the video stays up, Sony gets a royalty check, and BBTV makes cash on the side. In other cases, that means the videos coming down entirely leaving the original IP holder free to pursue their own monetization and distribution. The only things, from my own experiences early this year, where the "take it down entirely" concept came into play was with full episodes of Wheel and Jeopardy. In virtually every other case, the rightsholders have left the videos up, and simply chosen to monetize it themselves.
That reminds me a nice article I read regarding the FremantleMedia-BBTV relationship I read earlier this year:
http://www.betakit.com/broadbandtv-monetizes-youtube-clips-that-brands-used-to-call-piracy-now-its-partnering-up-with-fremantle-media/
-
That reminds me a nice article I read regarding the FremantleMedia-BBTV relationship I read earlier this year:
http://www.betakit.com/broadbandtv-monetizes-youtube-clips-that-brands-used-to-call-piracy-now-its-partnering-up-with-fremantle-media/
Any article that spells it "Family Fued" is trying to dissuade me from reading it.
-
Ironic that YouTube monetizes some of the copyright-infringing videos with a commercial prior to people being able to see them.
Where do you think that money goes, most of the time?
YouTube?
-
Ironic that YouTube monetizes some of the copyright-infringing videos with a commercial prior to people being able to see them.
Where do you think that money goes, most of the time?
YouTube?
[The content creators] get to sit back, let us as game show fans continue to share the content we're passionate about (within reason), and in exchange they get to serve ads and collect the royalty money. We get the content, they get the money. It's as close to an "everyone wins" scenario as you can get in this situation.
Plz connect the dots yourself next time.
-
Ironic that YouTube monetizes some of the copyright-infringing videos with a commercial prior to people being able to see them.
Where do you think that money goes, most of the time?
YouTube?
[The content creators] get to sit back, let us as game show fans continue to share the content we're passionate about (within reason), and in exchange they get to serve ads and collect the royalty money. We get the content, they get the money. It's as close to an "everyone wins" scenario as you can get in this situation.
Plz connect the dots yourself next time.
That does not make sense. Why would [the content creators] demand removal when they're making money off it?
-
Sigh.
Because they want to.
Some content creators are OK with snippets, clips, or one or two full episodes on their page. They work with YouTube to monetize some of their works via the Content ID system.
Other content creators are not—they're doing someone else with their content, whether it's prepping it for onDemand work, scrubbing the Internet, or losing rights to monetization—a variety of things.
There are a bunch of different companies who own rights to a lot of different properties. They are not all the same. There is room for content creators to do different things.