On 1/30/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to make it even easier for people to go to your site and
comment when they watch your film in iTunes, you can add a clickable
link at the end of your Quicktime video, which people in iTunes can
click on to take them directly to your site.
On 1/30/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, Mike, I hadn't read what you'd written - just Steve's reply.
I should have been clearer. There *are* links back to your website
in the fucking interface :-), to allow you to read and comment.
btw... sorry for using the f*ck word... was late
Yeah - you're totally right, of course.
On 31 Jan 2007, at 09:09, Mike Meiser wrote:
Clearly every other webservice and aggregator has all sorts of
mechanisms for interoperability... itunes is VERY closed. Just want
people to relize that. I mean if we can't get permalinks back to your
site then
I know what you mean, and its logical on one level. But on the
otherhand Im sure there is rather a lot of material that is
copyrighted, being distributed via RSS and other methods.
For example if I download a podcast from the BBC, its still
copyrighted by the BBC. They have chosen how the
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill had a good point. iTunes *directory* is opt in. Most of us did it
by default when setting up our feedburner feeds. I don't recall ever
agreeing to any terms of service with apple though that compromised my
god given right to
On 1/28/07, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/27/07, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Im not sure Id agree that a sense of victimization or righteous anger
are the primary driving forces behind such things, but they are in the
mix somewhere when it comes to reactions of music
On 1/30/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know about your feedburner point, but I'll take your word for
it. The only reasons I got involved with feedburner was to format my
feed to go to iTunes and for (24-hour after the fact) stats.
That's a great point you have about
On 1/28/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, micropayments, that favorite topic of mine! Way back when, long
before blip, I tried to build a micropayments service with a few of the
folks now at blip. The challenges we saw then are the same challenges
we see now: in order to do
On 1/29/07, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apple has a link to our website on our podcast page at the iTunes
Store
apparently they are. last i checked i didnt see linkbacks. has this been
the case for a while now?
i dont use itunes much so I was taking mike meiser's word for it. good
On 1/29/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apple has a link to our website on our podcast page at the iTunes
Store and we get lots of traffic from them. If it wasn't for Apple
we wouldn't have the advertisers that we have today. We also have
lots of comments on our Apple page
I admit to using it to watch video. Its not the best experience but I
am not totally satisfied with the other video aggregating apps either,
and as I often have itunes open to listen to music, it seemed convenient.
I can certainly appreciate the anger about their non-inclusion of the
accompanying
If you want to make it even easier for people to go to your site and
comment when they watch your film in iTunes, you can add a clickable
link at the end of your Quicktime video, which people in iTunes can
click on to take them directly to your site. Hardly anyone does this
that I've seen
Sorry, Mike, I hadn't read what you'd written - just Steve's reply.
I should have been clearer. There *are* links back to your website
in the fucking interface :-), to allow you to read and comment.
If you click on the top line of each subscribed podcast in the
podcast section, a little
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/30/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know about your feedburner point, but I'll take your word for
it. The only reasons I got involved with feedburner was to format my
feed to go to iTunes
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Copyright gives you different powers over taking, displaying, and
profiting. It gives you great power over redistribution. In the case
of displaying via an embed it gives you very little power (though over
aspects of
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lucas Gonze
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:59 AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy and Magnify and
aggregators in general
Copyright gives
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lucas Gonze
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 11:51 PM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy and Magnify and
aggregators in general
On 1/28/07, Ron
I think we can all agree that the economy, whether on a global scale or
on a smaller scale such as the one we're currently discussing, is not a
zero-sum game.
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Sunday, January
I agree with Lucas on this one, sull, at least insomuch as I disagree
with you. Businesses should be absolutely free to add value to the
media landscape by aggregating media into single locations and thereby
adding value that wasn't previously there. To my mind the issue is more
about the level
What still suprises me is that people get so mad at myheavy and all
these others and yet the biggest offender of them all is itunes with
their iTunes.
They're using 10's of thousands of vloggers and podcasters to build
traffic in their marketplace to sell mainstream media, and more ipods
and
It's the difference between personal aggregation and global aggregation.
It's an extremely important distinction. I don't have a right to demand
much of anything from the developers of Firefox in terms of how they
display my Web pages. The location bar may be a standard part of the
user
that's a good question.and it seems when you have asked it in the
past the Apple folks are very quiet..I know I have the Creatvie
Zen M and I get my content though Zencast and it is software I
download but they provide link backs so it's not a matter of not
being able to..very good
If the software is both for personal and global aggregation, which iTunes,
fireant, democracy and any desktop aggregator that includes a directory,
whether or not that directory is available on the web external of its
desktop wrapper, then the issue that Mike Meiser is stating is indeed legit
and
you have misinterpreted, mike. possibly my fault as my writing may not have
been clear in its seperation of acceptable business practice.
of course aggregation services are good. i wouldnt have created a videoblog
directory if i thought otherwise.
i believe you probably were disagreeing with
I am often disgusted by Apple...
Is there even once example of Apple implementing user feedback?
Maybe, but from my view, they ignore outside feedback especially when it
comes to this grass roots media revolution that has been ongoing for 3-4
years.
It can be argued that iTunes isnt the same
BTW, iTunes UI sucks so bad for video because it was made for playing mp3's,
non-visual media. On the other hand give me video aggregation in iPhoto and
I'd be in seventh heaven. iPhoto is made for visual media. iTunes needs
less lists, more thumbnails and more play in place video. iRonically
Apple has a link to our website on our podcast page at the iTunes
Store and we get lots of traffic from them. If it wasn't for Apple
we wouldn't have the advertisers that we have today. We also have
lots of comments on our Apple page from people who love us and hate
us. So there is a
Here here, Tim.
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:43 PM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy and Magnify and
aggregators in
Does iTunes aggregate?
I believe the last time this came up, the response was that people in
the iTunes podcast directory ASKED to be in it. In fact, I had to
_apply_ and then wait three days before my podacast was 'approved'.
This is different from someone grabbing your feed and acting like
Apple has a link to our website on our podcast page at the iTunes
Store
apparently they are. last i checked i didnt see linkbacks. has this been
the case for a while now?
i dont use itunes much so I was taking mike meiser's word for it. good to
know :)
On 1/29/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was just thinking of micro-payments. Any info out there on the
topic, or can we have a conversation.
Cheers,
Ron Watson
Pawsitive Vybe
11659 Berrigan Ave
Cedar Springs, MI 49319
http://pawsitivevybe.com
Personal Contact:
616.802.8923
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On the Web:
http://pawsitivevybe.com
I don't see a problem with this course. Thanks for the hard work
you're putting into this, Mike.
-- Enric
-==-
http://www.cirne.com
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey guys,
I just wanted to give everyone an update on where we stand
Steve's and Roxanne's posts above are right on. We are, in fact
discussing a number of issues and, frankly, I think the reasonable
person can find a fair course through the complex. I think we're
doing that -- as Roxanne suggests -- by having these discussions
here. Lucas, I do not want to
Ah, micropayments, that favorite topic of mine! Way back when, long
before blip, I tried to build a micropayments service with a few of the
folks now at blip. The challenges we saw then are the same challenges
we see now: in order to do micropayments effectively you need a system
to pool
The problem is that videobloggers are going down the same hopelessly
unrealistic and ultimately disastrous path as the record labels and
movie companies.
That's quite a statement. One that I think is entirely wrong.
I have no problem with you aggregating my video. Even if your site
has
To try to shame those of us
standing up for our rights by calling us victims is to miss the
point. Corporations, especially when they have capital, have
advantages that tilt the playing field in their favor and make it
easy for them to take advantage of our small independent operator
On 1/27/07, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Im not sure Id agree that a sense of victimization or righteous anger
are the primary driving forces behind such things, but they are in the
mix somewhere when it comes to reactions of music etc industry.
When somebody makes the argument that
On 1/28/07, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the reasonable
person can find a fair course through the complex. I think we're
doing that -- as Roxanne suggests -- by having these discussions
here.
So here's the fair course that I see -- there should be clear and
unambiguous agreements
http://blip.tv/file/139457/
...let's continue this conversation with moving pictures.
Let's say you argue that aggregated creators deserve a share of the
profits of an aggregator. That doesn't follow from economics. The
economic point of view is that investors in the aggregator, its
owners, are the ones who deserve a share of the profits, because they
also stood to lose money
You're conceiving of this from the opposite angle, saying that the
little guy should get the benefit of the doubt; I'm arguing that
whenever that's the situation it is the little guy who gets shut out.
If you want an environment that is fair to the little guy, you can
only have it by making
Your 'nothing lost, nothing gained' argument is an interesting injection
here but i do feel it is besides the point of the issue that matters most
within this discussion... which is about those who are the owners of
intellectual/creative property that are licensed and made available
Lucas, I did not, nor did anyone participating in this discussion
make the argument that a third party's profit is necessarily someone
else's loss. No one said any such thing. What many people are
saying is that they don't want others, with most of the emphasis on
corporations, profiting
On 1/28/07, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
there is a big difference from playing a ditty at a wedding
and selling CDs by the truckload. They are not like at all. Of course
they were wrong to argue that.
Under the law there is no difference between playing a ditty
at a wedding and selling
I don't see how we're asking for expansive rights by not allowing
corporations to take our work in its entirety, display it and profit
from it with no attribution or direct linkage. I don't see how
seeking permission and or compensation for usage of our work is
somehow a giant leap.
On 1/28/07, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see how we're asking for expansive rights by not allowing
corporations to take our work in its entirety, display it and profit
from it with no attribution or direct linkage. I don't see how
seeking permission and or compensation for usage
Are we seriously okay with opt-out? A thousand aggregators take your
material and use it however they want. Does anyone have the time to
sift the net and sift those sites to ensure your material is being
used as you have licensed it to be used? A CC, non-commercial
license means you have to
I guess this depends on exactly what we mean by opt-out. Clearly the
rages against various sites shows that being asked to opt-out of
something we may not even know exists, is no good.
But most of the recent opt-out stuff, has been related to blip.tv.
This is different because it only applies to
Thanks for your thoughts Steve. Your faith in blip is understandable
and I share it: they've been remarkably good brokers and advocates
for this community. As I hope I communicated, my concerns are not
about blip. Quite the contrary, I think they're doing everything
they can to empower us.
It is fascinating to read between the lines and learn business
diplomacy from Mike.
I agree with David, when it comes to the legality and morality of the
issue, opt out simply empowers the illegal and immoral actions of
these secondary agrigators and distributors of our content. They want
and
John,
I'm going to reply to David directly in just a moment. I'd just like to
point out that my ability to discuss the particular case of Magnify
right now is fairly limited since negotiations with Magnify are ongoing
and I don't want to jeopardize those conversations. It's kind of like
lawyers
Cheers, though I feel we are ever so slightly talking at
cross-purposes and misunderstanding eachother on a couple of details,
but not the main issues.
Im basically saying that although it seems straightforward, the term
'non-commercial' is subject to interpretation. Im not saying that
creative
I'm going to respond to each e-mail in this thread individually, or at
least try to. Before doing that, though, I'd like to ensure that we
have clarity around our terms, particularly the difference between
opt-in and opt-out. These are terms of art that originated in the
e-mail marketing space
I think part of the confusion was because you accidentally used the
terms the wrong way round when talking about Magnify the other day
You will be able to control
aggregation
to Magnify through a control panel in the blip.tv Dashboard.
Because of
Magnify's current position on
The problem that we have right now is that in some ways we're playing a
game of whack-a-mole. As sites like Veoh, MyHeavy and Magnify come to
our attention we have approached them and worked to solve the problem
presented by their behavior. There are lots of other sites out there,
and they'll
That would SO do it. And to think I had Charles proofread that e-mail
before I sent it out!
So, yeah, apologies for that. Our current thinking is to make Magnify
opt-in, rather than opt-out.
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
I don't want to apply opt-out to an aggregator unless they agree to
abide by this community's definition of best practices and actually do
so. Under these circumstances, and these circumstances alone, should an
aggregator be placed in a privileged position such as opt-out.
Otherwise the
A default position of opt-out is one of the most powerful negotiating
tools I have in my arsenal, and it allows me to tell a company that I
can give them access to a great library of content if they'll follow the
rules.
+1. And thanks for spending all this time on this Mike, it's important.
I'm having trouble following and contributing to this discussion
because the posts aren't showing up in any order I can determine.
Seriously. Weird.
Anyway, Mike, please don't feel it necessary to respond to my earlier
posts. You've explained that the opt-out/opt-in that you're
I think we're in 100% agreement.
-Original Message-
From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 12:40 PM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: MyHeavy and Magnify and
aggregators in
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem that we have right now is that in some ways we're playing a
game of whack-a-mole. As sites like Veoh, MyHeavy and Magnify come to
our attention we have approached them and worked to solve the problem
The web space could not exist with opt out.
The search space fundamentally would not exist if it were opt out.
Our job is not to figure out the best standards for opt-in... indeed
there need be no standard on opt-in at all...
Our job is to figure out the minimum standards for opt in, so this
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is the value ads that must be opt in. I.E. if myheavy or magnify
want to put ads on your content that should be opt in.
Peace,
-Mike
mefeedia.com
mmeiser.com/blog
+1. If the TTL of the options we select when
So what is our community's standard of best practices that an aggregator is
held against?
What do you tell these businesses when you're in their board room?
Jay
-Original Message-
From: Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 12:02:34
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Since we're using this list to publicly discuss these relationships between a
video hosting site and aggregatorsit'd be good if we all defined what we
expect when someone uses ouir videos.
Jay
-Original Message-
From: Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007
I think theres been several concerted efforts to do that in the last
month or so. I didnt think that quite a wide enough range of people
fully contributed to the debate, but thats easy for me to say as I
clearly have more hours than is healthy to talk about this stuff.
Its certainly a lot easier
Absolutely. I've been working from the discussions we've had on this
list previously, including the best practices document that you, me and
Bre put together during the Veoh catastrophe and with the draft I've put
up on videovertigo.org at
http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/, which
Hello Mike,
Thanks for all your good work, and this arrangement sounds reasonable
and appropriate. You definitely where a white hat.
Now, maybe you can help me with some Hollywood business.
All the best
Daniel McVicar
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/27/07, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even accepting reality for what it is, however, there are
many good reasons to continue to push for our rights as creators to
be sacrosanct.
The problem is that videobloggers are going down the same hopelessly
unrealistic and ultimately disastrous
Im not sure Id agree that a sense of victimization or righteous anger
are the primary driving forces behind such things, but they are in the
mix somewhere when it comes to reactions of music etc industry. Ive
yet to see it from any vlogger in response to creative re-use of an
element of their
There are separate issues here.
1) is the CC license - and yes people want attribution. It's a fairly
common human trait and in itself does not stifle creativity. And of
course, all of this creativity comes from somewhere - it is my big
picture belief that from way out there it all belongs to all
Thanks for your considerable and valuable effort on these important
matters Mike.
One thing, though. You wrote:
Because of Magnify's current position on advertising we are
considering the possibility of making the default position for
Magnify opt-out rather than opt-in ... Content
72 matches
Mail list logo
