YouTube law fight 'threatens net'

[Ilikemuppets]

**** right you can't trust them about this! As soon as they see who exactly has uploaded these "copyright-infringing" videos, they're going to want to sue their butts for every penny they got!

Even if they wern't seeking user's identity, it is still disturbing they that want to look. Invasion or privacy is invasion of privacy no matter how you stack it.

 

[Colbynfriends]

Good points D"Snowth and Ilikemuppets. I was so exited to get an acount, now look whats happening. as i would say in this situation "FORGET IT!"
I personaly think youtube should get all there videos with smut and bumfights off first. (even though its viacom thats doing this) maybe viacom should take a lesson out of this by putting the shows from youtube that they don't air anymore, and make a channel and start airing them, or something like that.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

maybe viacom should take a lesson out of this by putting the shows from youtube that they don't air anymore, and make a channel and start airing them, or something like that.

It would be nice if they would learn a lesson, but the only thing they learned it that their way if the only way and the right way.

 

[Drtooth]

I Agree. its kind of like what Timmy from Fairly Odd Parents said to the 70's version of his dad:
"One day, there will be 1000 tv channles, but nothing to watch"

That's because all 1000 channels have the same crap on them. There's millions of hours of television is existance. We do not need 2 episodes of Maury Povich a day.

Now, this is scary and a good idea where the internet is headed. The great corporate dumpster with radio, TV and movies.

This bullcrap about "undermining" copyright laws? And invaiding people's privacy to try to get money THEY LOST THEMSELVES FOR HAVING SLOPPY PROGRAMMING AND MANAGEMENT by suing people that don't have money is as rediculous as it gets.

I agree with Colbyandfreinds. They are doing NOTHING to get rid of terrorist training videos, amature porn, and various Jackmule type dangerous stunts. but they at least have the right to free speach there. There's no right for paid speach.

The "lost" revenues (if they really exist) are perfect punnishment for these idiot's mismangaement and mishandlkeing of TV. You let the writers strike, you made us put up with America's top Dog, Celebrity Circus, and such, and now you're blaming everyone else for your mishandelings and outright idiocy? Your fault.

 

[Colbynfriends]

That's because all 1000 channels have the same crap on them. There's millions of hours of television is existance. We do not need 2 episodes of Maury Povich a day.

Now, this is scary and a good idea where the internet is headed. The great corporate dumpster with radio, TV and movies.

This bullcrap about "undermining" copyright laws? And invaiding people's privacy to try to get money THEY LOST THEMSELVES FOR HAVING SLOPPY PROGRAMMING AND MANAGEMENT by suing people that don't have money is as rediculous as it gets.

I agree with Colbyandfreinds. They are doing NOTHING to get rid of terrorist training videos, amature porn, and various Jackmule type dangerous stunts. but they at least have the right to free speach there. There's no right for paid speach.

The "lost" revenues (if they really exist) are perfect punnishment for these idiot's mismangaement and mishandlkeing of TV. You let the writers strike, you made us put up with America's top Dog, Celebrity Circus, and such, and now you're blaming everyone else for your mishandelings and outright idiocy? Your fault.

True on free speach. It seems they come out with some of THE STUPITEST shows i've ever seen. Now, some of them are ok, but thats just a personal preffrence for me (Supernanny, Dog the Bounty Hunter) but shows like The Simple Life and other things like that. but unfortunatnly, they will keep making them because there trying to make the next Survivor, or Amarican Idol. the other thing that bothers me about it, is when one company has the show idea, and everyone else makes there own version (Fox's Nanny 911, ABC's Supernanny (still like the shows though) or Wife Swap and Trading Spouses. I Mean come on, not only are the airwaves full of reality shows, but its really bad when theres ones with the SAME IDEA. heres an idea for them, BE ORIGIONAL AND DON"T COPY. you know what i mean? gee, if it wasn't for shows like The Simpsons, King of the Hill, and even Chowder, i might not watch TV as much or at all .

 

[anythingmuppet]

Due to all this hype and paranoia resulting from Viacom's selfishness and outright idiocy, I, in fear of losing my own account, was forced to delete my own crafted YouTube Poop (of which contained content that was from a show that is on CN's [adult swim] block which I believe is owned by Viacom). Ah well, no one watched it/liked it anyway.

 

[D'Snowth]

Very well put Drtooth and Colby!

It's been said before, but I'ma say one last time: if they would actually spend the money to release this stuff OFFICIALLY on DVD, then people won't have to post it on YouTube in the first place!

There ARE people out there who are willing to spend anywhere between $19 and $50 for things like this on DVD, but these companies like Viacom don't want to spend THEIR money to put them on DVD, and people REALLY want to see them, so what are they going to do? If some lucky son-of-a-gun has it, he's going to post it on YouTube for all to enjoy!

If Viacom is seriously going to try to pull every single "copyrighted" video off YouTube, what's that going to leave us with? Gay guys screaming about people mistreating Britney Spears, punk teenagers beating the crap out of each other, old ladies who have "talking" cats, and like Drtooth said, amateur porn.

You know something? If strikes and boycotts really worked, then I'd suggest everybody on YouTube stop watching videos right away... I mean, if they don't show up on their "history", then Viacom won't know about it right? But then again, this is including PAST viewing history isn't it? So that won't work at all really.

Bottom line. It's sad, but privacy doesn't exist anymore.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I do understand the company's position, but they really should start utilizing the Internet more than they have been. I mean, that's where the technology (and the audience) is going, period.

Just wanted to mention though, I've been told that in some countries such as Russia, citizens can discover that their embassy has photos of them that they didn't even know existed, whether they like it or not. And they can't just sue like we love doing in America. In other countries, you can get stoned if you walk down the street with a man who isn't your husband.

So I'm just saying, as far as privacy goes, it could be a lot worse.

 

[anythingmuppet]

You'd think though that the original creators of the work have no problem with someone putting their work up for all to see on YouTube or its ilk? I know that the creators of South Park actually had no problem with anyone downloading the episodes for free on file-sharing services. Of course, Viacom said no to that, no questions asked.

It truly convinces me that the whole copyright concern on the Internet nowadays is not representative of the creator of the work, but the conglomerate who owns it. It may seem as if I'm stating the obvious here, but I wanted to make a distinction between the creator demanding his/her work taken of the web and the conglomerate demanding that there is to be no 'violation of copyright'.

It's quite frightening that the actual CREATORS of the work of which they are selling out to the public seem to have no voice in how/if their work is allowed to be distributed online.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

It's quite frightening that the actual CREATORS of the work of which they are selling out to the public seem to have no voice in how/if their work is allowed to be distributed online.

Yeah, that says a lot.

So I'm just saying, as far as privacy goes, it could be a lot worse.

I agree with you there.