[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Frank Sinton]

I'm not sure why these aggregators don't provide a link - the 
Permalink is provided in the RSS feed. Mefeedia does this everywhere 
there is a reference to your video. It is easy.

Thanks,
-Frank

Frank Sinton
CEO, Mefeedia
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.mefeedia.com - Find, Watch, and Share great videoblogs 
and podcasts.
Our blog: http://mefeedia.com/blog


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "We build a page for each producer's
> > show, complete with your show name, a link to your original 
website,
> > links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links 
to
> > the original media."
> 
> I think that is an interesting statement.
> 
> My 'original' website links to my RSS feed, and links to my  
> 'original' media.
> 
> The only problem is that they are not respecting my 'original' 
media.  
> Or my original site. Or my RSS feed (or at least Steve's which has 
a  
> proper CC in the feed...).
> 
> They are creating new media with my content. That's uncool.
> 
> I have yet to ask them to remove our show from their listings, as 
I  
> have yet to do with Magnify.net, which I consider to be the same  
> disrespectful business model of Pyro and My Heavy.
> 
> These asshats need to start playing by some respectful rules. 
Just  
> because they went out and whored themselves for big VC money 
doesn't  
> give them the right to slurp up our content and give us some song 
and  
> dance about how they really are helping us.
> 
> For crying out loud! Is it that difficult to give a link and not 
to  
> re-encode content, and to drive traffic to the original site? Of  
> course it's not.
> 
> They simply have zero respect for independent content creators. 
And  
> that's the real rub, isn't it?
> 
> I mean is anyone here not offended by the total lack of respect 
that  
> they give all of us?
> 
> I'd like to see a my heavy, pyro, magnify business model that was  
> scraping corporate media's content.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ron Watson
> 
> On the Web:
> http://pawsitivevybe.com
> http://k9disc.com
> http://k9disc.blip.tv
> 
> 
> On Apr 15, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> 
> > Aha, interesting, I hadnt noticed the permalink issue.
> >
> > Their publishers page still says "We build a page for each 
producer's
> > show, complete with your show name, a link to your original 
website,
> > links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links 
to
> > the original media." so hopefully this is just some oversight 
when
> > they redesigned their site - was it working as advertised in the 
past?
> >
> > Hmm I said I wouldnt still be ranting about network2 in 6 
months, but
> > that was based on no new violations of creators rights. Still, I 
feel
> > more than a little awkward being in this territory again.
> >
> > I had hoped that the strong networking by network2's Chris 
Brogan, the
> > participation of some vloggers in that VON and other meetups, 
and the
> > participation by some members of this community in the network2
> > competition, meant there were exceedingly strong channels of
> > communication between creators and network2, and that therefore 
this
> > sort of thing was unlikely to happen.
> >
> > What do people think about them now including easily 
cut&pasteable
> > 'permalinks' for your videos, which are permalinks to the 
network2
> > page for the show, and also their embedded player, which I havent
> > tried yet but suspect will be another feature designed to drive
> > traffic to their site and not to the content creators.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve Elbows
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Garfield   
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It matters.
> > >
> > > I just emailed them to fix it.
> > >
> > > No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed )
> > >
> > > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> > >
> > > No display of CC license ( it's in the feed )
> > >
> > > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> > >
> > > --Steve
> > >
> > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> > >
> > > > if sites like
> > > > network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so  
> > much if
> > > > they dont show creative commons feed info?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Steve Garfield
> > > http://SteveGarfield.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Steve Watkins]

Can I ask for clarification on who you are refering to? Because its
got a bit confusing because we were talking about pyro.tv but then I
started talking about network2.tv, and the quote about 'link to your
original website' is from network2 rather than pyro.

Sorry for confusing the issue!

Steve Elbows

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "We build a page for each producer's
> > show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website,
> > links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to
> > the original media."
> 
> I think that is an interesting statement.
> 
> My 'original' website links to my RSS feed, and links to my  
> 'original' media.
> 
> The only problem is that they are not respecting my 'original' media.  
> Or my original site. Or my RSS feed (or at least Steve's which has a  
> proper CC in the feed...).
> 
> They are creating new media with my content. That's uncool.
> 
> I have yet to ask them to remove our show from their listings, as I  
> have yet to do with Magnify.net, which I consider to be the same  
> disrespectful business model of Pyro and My Heavy.
> 
> These asshats need to start playing by some respectful rules. Just  
> because they went out and whored themselves for big VC money doesn't  
> give them the right to slurp up our content and give us some song and  
> dance about how they really are helping us.
> 
> For crying out loud! Is it that difficult to give a link and not to  
> re-encode content, and to drive traffic to the original site? Of  
> course it's not.
> 
> They simply have zero respect for independent content creators. And  
> that's the real rub, isn't it?
> 
> I mean is anyone here not offended by the total lack of respect that  
> they give all of us?
> 
> I'd like to see a my heavy, pyro, magnify business model that was  
> scraping corporate media's content.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ron Watson
> 
> On the Web:
> http://pawsitivevybe.com
> http://k9disc.com
> http://k9disc.blip.tv
> 
> 
> On Apr 15, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> 
> > Aha, interesting, I hadnt noticed the permalink issue.
> >
> > Their publishers page still says "We build a page for each producer's
> > show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website,
> > links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to
> > the original media." so hopefully this is just some oversight when
> > they redesigned their site - was it working as advertised in the past?
> >
> > Hmm I said I wouldnt still be ranting about network2 in 6 months, but
> > that was based on no new violations of creators rights. Still, I feel
> > more than a little awkward being in this territory again.
> >
> > I had hoped that the strong networking by network2's Chris Brogan, the
> > participation of some vloggers in that VON and other meetups, and the
> > participation by some members of this community in the network2
> > competition, meant there were exceedingly strong channels of
> > communication between creators and network2, and that therefore this
> > sort of thing was unlikely to happen.
> >
> > What do people think about them now including easily cut&pasteable
> > 'permalinks' for your videos, which are permalinks to the network2
> > page for the show, and also their embedded player, which I havent
> > tried yet but suspect will be another feature designed to drive
> > traffic to their site and not to the content creators.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve Elbows
> >
> > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Garfield   
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It matters.
> > >
> > > I just emailed them to fix it.
> > >
> > > No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed )
> > >
> > > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> > >
> > > No display of CC license ( it's in the feed )
> > >
> > > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> > >
> > > --Steve
> > >
> > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> > >
> > > > if sites like
> > > > network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so  
> > much if
> > > > they dont show creative commons feed info?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Steve Garfield
> > > http://SteveGarfield.com
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Ron Watson]

> "We build a page for each producer's
> show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website,
> links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to
> the original media."

I think that is an interesting statement.

My 'original' website links to my RSS feed, and links to my  
'original' media.

The only problem is that they are not respecting my 'original' media.  
Or my original site. Or my RSS feed (or at least Steve's which has a  
proper CC in the feed...).

They are creating new media with my content. That's uncool.

I have yet to ask them to remove our show from their listings, as I  
have yet to do with Magnify.net, which I consider to be the same  
disrespectful business model of Pyro and My Heavy.

These asshats need to start playing by some respectful rules. Just  
because they went out and whored themselves for big VC money doesn't  
give them the right to slurp up our content and give us some song and  
dance about how they really are helping us.

For crying out loud! Is it that difficult to give a link and not to  
re-encode content, and to drive traffic to the original site? Of  
course it's not.

They simply have zero respect for independent content creators. And  
that's the real rub, isn't it?

I mean is anyone here not offended by the total lack of respect that  
they give all of us?

I'd like to see a my heavy, pyro, magnify business model that was  
scraping corporate media's content.

Cheers,
Ron Watson

On the Web:
http://pawsitivevybe.com
http://k9disc.com
http://k9disc.blip.tv


On Apr 15, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Steve Watkins wrote:

> Aha, interesting, I hadnt noticed the permalink issue.
>
> Their publishers page still says "We build a page for each producer's
> show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website,
> links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to
> the original media." so hopefully this is just some oversight when
> they redesigned their site - was it working as advertised in the past?
>
> Hmm I said I wouldnt still be ranting about network2 in 6 months, but
> that was based on no new violations of creators rights. Still, I feel
> more than a little awkward being in this territory again.
>
> I had hoped that the strong networking by network2's Chris Brogan, the
> participation of some vloggers in that VON and other meetups, and the
> participation by some members of this community in the network2
> competition, meant there were exceedingly strong channels of
> communication between creators and network2, and that therefore this
> sort of thing was unlikely to happen.
>
> What do people think about them now including easily cut&pasteable
> 'permalinks' for your videos, which are permalinks to the network2
> page for the show, and also their embedded player, which I havent
> tried yet but suspect will be another feature designed to drive
> traffic to their site and not to the content creators.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> >
> > It matters.
> >
> > I just emailed them to fix it.
> >
> > No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed )
> >
> > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> >
> > No display of CC license ( it's in the feed )
> >
> > http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> >
> > --Steve
> >
> > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> >
> > > if sites like
> > > network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so  
> much if
> > > they dont show creative commons feed info?
> >
> > --
> > Steve Garfield
> > http://SteveGarfield.com
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Steve Watkins]

Aha, interesting, I hadnt noticed the permalink issue.

Their publishers page still says "We build a page for each producer's
show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website,
links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to
the original media." so hopefully this is just some oversight when
they redesigned their site - was it working as advertised in the past?

Hmm I said I wouldnt still be ranting about network2 in 6 months, but
that was based on no new violations of creators rights. Still, I feel
more than a little awkward being in this territory again.

I had hoped that the strong networking by network2's Chris Brogan, the
participation of some vloggers in that VON and other meetups, and the
participation by some members of this community in the network2
competition, meant there were exceedingly strong channels of
communication between creators and network2, and that therefore this
sort of thing was unlikely to happen.

What do people think about them now including easily cut&pasteable
'permalinks' for your videos, which are permalinks to the network2
page for the show, and also their embedded player, which I havent
tried yet but suspect will be another feature designed to drive
traffic to their site and not to the content creators.

Cheers

Steve Elbows

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It matters.
> 
> I just emailed them to fix it.
> 
> No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed )
> 
> http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> 
> No display of CC license ( it's in the feed )
> 
> http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/
> 
> --Steve
> 
> On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:
> 
> >  if sites like
> > network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so much if
> > they dont show creative commons feed info?
> 
> --
> Steve Garfield
> http://SteveGarfield.com
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Steve Garfield]

It matters.

I just emailed them to fix it.

No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed )

http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/

No display of CC license ( it's in the feed )

http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/

--Steve

On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:

>  if sites like
> network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so much if
> they dont show creative commons feed info?

--
Steve Garfield
http://SteveGarfield.com

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Steve Watkins]

By reencoding footage they are on extremely rocky legal ground.

They are actively redistributing content, and so they absolutely must
adhere to peoples license. They cant try and wriggle around in the
grey area that some who only embed videos have over this issue in the
past.

They are also most definatly making commercial use of these videos,
they are a company, its a business (see
http://www.vibesolutions.net/vsg/htdocs/about/press_release-20070327.jsp
for example) , and again by re-encoding and hosting I think the issue
is much less grey. 

So they are commercial, so even if they properly honoured the other
creative commons terms such as attribution and displaying the license,
they are not granted the rights they are taking.

The only grey I can see in this issue is if someone legally ruled that
such use of video was not commercial. If I were that judge I would
obviously not come to such a determination, being as the video is the
main commodity that creates value for these businesses.

They are not the first to cling to the DMCA ideas about copyright,
that we must opt-out of this leechery. In the past some here have
thought this an innapropriate defense, being as DMCA provisions apply
to the likes of youtube and users uploading copyrighted clips on a
manual basis. Wheras wholesale ripping of RSS syndication feeds on an
automatic basis, doesnt quite seem within the spirit of that
particualr DMCA mechanism, as Veoh found out to their peril.

This conversation faded out again last time without any satisfactory
conclusion to the 'show creative commons license on your site' issue.
I was someone who wanted blip.tv to exert more pressure on its
partners to make sure this information is present on the partner
sites. I havent seen this happening, but then again if sites like
network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so much if
they dont show creative commons feed info? Its the opt-out ones that
need to make sure they follow every letter of a license because they
havent received rights explicitly granted to them by the video
creators, they have to rely on the cc ones.

Cheers

Steve Elbows

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Kent Nichols"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We had our stuff removed last month and we're working through partners
> to get them to realize that reencoding is not cool.
> 
> -K
> 
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "ryanne hodson"
>  wrote:
> >
> > i also got a response from them saying what sull had said
> > that they transcode so it's a more reliable playback experience...
> > 
> > "Ryanne - I'll have your channel removed as soon as possible.  Just
> an FYI,
> > I
> > understand that transcoding and hosting is an issue, but we decided
> to go
> > ahead with it because it significantly improves the viewing
> experience in a
> > web environment.  We track all viewing data (not just downloads) and
> will be
> > making it available to all publishers in the next week."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 4/14/07, Steve Garfield  wrote:
> > >
> > >   I blogged about it here:
> > >
> > > http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/03/mike-hudacks-rules-for-
> > > video-sharing.html
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/2pvyg9
> > >
> > > And posted their initial response:
> > >
> > > Update from Pyro.tv via Roxanne:
> > >
> > > "I understand the importance of tracking views and data. We will be
> > > soon releasing a tool for publishers like yourself to get direct
> > > visibility to your feed and titles performance through our
service. I
> > > will let you know when it is available. In the meantime, I'd be
happy
> > > to pass along any data we had already gathered (granted we have only
> > > been public for a few days).
> > >
> > > I have passed your feedback to our product group and will be
> > > implementing changes as soon as we can. If you visit the site you
> > > should see that the pyro.tv watermark in the player has already been
> > > removed.
> > >
> > > I am also recommending a clear link in the player area titled "Visit
> > > this publisher's website" or something similar, among other changes
> > > to provide clear information about the content owner and rights.
> > >
> > > Any additional feedback you can provide would be greatly
> appreciated. "
> > >
> > >
> > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:44 AM, Steve Garfield wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey,
> > > > A few of us contacted them last month and since then they have
> > > > removed the branding from the video and added a link back to the
> > > > website.
> > > >
> > > > They still don't link to the permalink of the post and they don't
> > > > display the CC license that's embedded in my RSS feed.
> > > >
> > > > It's right in my feed:
> > > >
> > > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/
> > > >
> > > > --Steve
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 6:10 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Blip's ads do not play through.
> > > >>
> > > >> That's a factor...
> > > >>
> > > >> Jan
> > > >>
> > > >> On 4/14/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage
> 
> 

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[Kent Nichols]

We had our stuff removed last month and we're working through partners
to get them to realize that reencoding is not cool.

-K

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "ryanne hodson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> i also got a response from them saying what sull had said
> that they transcode so it's a more reliable playback experience...
> 
> "Ryanne - I'll have your channel removed as soon as possible.  Just
an FYI,
> I
> understand that transcoding and hosting is an issue, but we decided
to go
> ahead with it because it significantly improves the viewing
experience in a
> web environment.  We track all viewing data (not just downloads) and
will be
> making it available to all publishers in the next week."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/14/07, Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   I blogged about it here:
> >
> > http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/03/mike-hudacks-rules-for-
> > video-sharing.html
> >
> > or
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/2pvyg9
> >
> > And posted their initial response:
> >
> > Update from Pyro.tv via Roxanne:
> >
> > "I understand the importance of tracking views and data. We will be
> > soon releasing a tool for publishers like yourself to get direct
> > visibility to your feed and titles performance through our service. I
> > will let you know when it is available. In the meantime, I'd be happy
> > to pass along any data we had already gathered (granted we have only
> > been public for a few days).
> >
> > I have passed your feedback to our product group and will be
> > implementing changes as soon as we can. If you visit the site you
> > should see that the pyro.tv watermark in the player has already been
> > removed.
> >
> > I am also recommending a clear link in the player area titled "Visit
> > this publisher's website" or something similar, among other changes
> > to provide clear information about the content owner and rights.
> >
> > Any additional feedback you can provide would be greatly
appreciated. "
> >
> >
> > On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:44 AM, Steve Garfield wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > > A few of us contacted them last month and since then they have
> > > removed the branding from the video and added a link back to the
> > > website.
> > >
> > > They still don't link to the permalink of the post and they don't
> > > display the CC license that's embedded in my RSS feed.
> > >
> > > It's right in my feed:
> > >
> > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/
> > >
> > > --Steve
> > >
> > > On Apr 14, 2007, at 6:10 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote:
> > >
> > >> Blip's ads do not play through.
> > >>
> > >> That's a factor...
> > >>
> > >> Jan
> > >>
> > >> On 4/14/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> In the gold rushes the people who got rich were the ones selling
> > >>> pans and
> > >>> shovels, not the panners. People who are out to make a buck on the
> > >>> back of
> > >>> another will always be able find a way to do that. I don't
> > >>> respect them,
> > >>> but I accept them. Like I accept the existence of bacteria in my
> > >>> intestine. I know it's living in there, serving some kind of
> > >>> purpose, I
> > >>> just usually avoid thinking about it.
> > >>>
> > >>> If they become larger, like a tapeworm say, and start causing
health
> > >>> problems, like stealing viewership and therefore ad revenue, then
> > >>> maybe
> > >>> it's
> > >>> time to call in the Quinacrine, or a lawyer.
> > >>>
> > >>> Drunken metaphoring, sorry if none of that made sense.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Adam Quirk
> > >>> Wreck & Salvage
> > >>> 551.208.4644
> > >>> Brooklyn, NY
> > >>> http://wreckandsalvage.com
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> The Faux Press - better than real
> > >> http://fauxpress.blogspot.com
> > >> http://twitter.com/fauxpress
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Steve Garfield
> > > http://SteveGarfield.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Steve Garfield
> > http://SteveGarfield.com
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> -- 
> Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[caroosky]

Then what about magnify.net?  I haven't looked closely at how they
aggregate videos...can anyone enlighten me?

Carter
CrowdAbout.us

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I blogged about it here:
> 
> http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/03/mike-hudacks-rules-for- 
> video-sharing.html
> 
> or
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/2pvyg9
> 
> And posted their initial response:
> 
> Update from Pyro.tv via Roxanne:
> 
> "I understand the importance of tracking views and data. We will be  
> soon releasing a tool for publishers like yourself to get direct  
> visibility to your feed and titles performance through our service. I  
> will let you know when it is available. In the meantime, I'd be happy  
> to pass along any data we had already gathered (granted we have only  
> been public for a few days).
> 
> I have passed your feedback to our product group and will be  
> implementing changes as soon as we can. If you visit the site you  
> should see that the pyro.tv watermark in the player has already been  
> removed.
> 
> I am also recommending a clear link in the player area titled "Visit  
> this publisher's website" or something similar, among other changes  
> to provide clear information about the content owner and rights.
> 
> Any additional feedback you can provide would be greatly appreciated. "
> 
> 
> On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:44 AM, Steve Garfield wrote:
> 
> > Hey,
> > A few of us contacted them last month and since then they have
> > removed the branding from the video and added a link back to the
> > website.
> >
> > They still don't link to the permalink of the post and they don't
> > display the CC license that's embedded in my RSS feed.
> >
> > It's right in my feed:
> >
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/
> >
> > --Steve
> >
> > On Apr 14, 2007, at 6:10 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote:
> >
> >> Blip's ads do not play through.
> >>
> >> That's a factor...
> >>
> >> Jan
> >>
> >> On 4/14/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In the gold rushes the people who got rich were the ones selling
> >>> pans and
> >>> shovels, not the panners. People who are out to make a buck on the
> >>> back of
> >>> another will always be able find a way to do that.  I don't
> >>> respect them,
> >>> but I accept them.  Like I accept the existence of bacteria in my
> >>> intestine.  I know it's living in there, serving some kind of
> >>> purpose, I
> >>> just usually avoid thinking about it.
> >>>
> >>> If they become larger, like a tapeworm say, and start causing health
> >>> problems, like stealing viewership and therefore ad revenue, then
> >>> maybe
> >>> it's
> >>> time to call in the Quinacrine, or a lawyer.
> >>>
> >>> Drunken metaphoring, sorry if none of that made sense.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Adam Quirk
> >>> Wreck & Salvage
> >>> 551.208.4644
> >>> Brooklyn, NY
> >>> http://wreckandsalvage.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> The Faux Press - better than real
> >> http://fauxpress.blogspot.com
> >> http://twitter.com/fauxpress
> >>
> >>
> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Steve Garfield
> > http://SteveGarfield.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Steve Garfield
> http://SteveGarfield.com
>

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[caroosky]

Long live blip.tv.  I agree, their strategy of offering the flv
permalink sets them apart in a world of vieo hosting options.  And
with that single link, we videobloggers have a whole host of other fun
things we can do with our content.

(This has been an unpaid and sincerely honest endorsement.)

Best,
Carter Harkins
http://CrowdAbout.us


--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think its in part because they want to assure all videos on their
site are
> flash in order to avoid playback issues with users... and also it
provides
> them with some deeper viewing stats as well.
> 
> They are using on2 flix 
> They are using their bandwidth.
> Both cost money.
> However
> The transcoding software is just good tool to have under the hood for a
> startup in the video space.
> So not a waste of money there.
> The bandwidth could also be insignificant until they become "BIG".
> 
> I think it comes back to stats and "it just works" perspective.
> Keep in mind, few services openly offer flv format like blip does.
> If more did so, then we would probably see less rehosting of the flash
> format.
> 
> Sull
> 
> On 4/14/07, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   They seem to be giving attribution and providing direct download
links
> > to the original file ... downloads will hit blip for stats and links
> > will hit feedburner and what not ... but the transcoding still bugs
> > me. I wonder why these sites are so determined to eat up their own
> > hosting/bandwidth space when they needn't?
> >
> > They seem to have come close at this site and say on their
"publishers"
> > page:
> >
> > "Protecting Your Stuff We are creative types ourselves and understand
> > that hollow and angry feeling when someone hijacks your stuff. So we
> > provide very visible attribution of your content, which we copy
> > completely intact with all beauty you intended. And if you don't want
> > your videos on Pyro.TV, we promise to take it down right away"
> >
> > Sounds like they may be the sort who will be willing to go that last
> > mile and stop the "copy" portion of their plan and just use the
> > content we're already distributing in the feed.
> >
> > ... here's hoping. :-)
> >
> > - Dave
> >
> >
> > On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > i'm referring them to the vertigo aggregator best practices
> > >
> > > http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/
> > >
> > > though i'm not seeing on there
> > > a specific clause about transcoding and re-hosting
> > > other than this phrase:
> > >
> > > "Aggregators should always conduct video playback in the video's
> > original
> > > player, rather than the aggregator's player."
> > >
> > > i don't think that's specific enough..
> > > that says original player, not original format.
> > > technically would that be considered the same thing?
> > >
> > > because quicktime just has one player
> > > flash could possibly have different players
> > > so i'm a little confused on that wording.
> > >
> > > -ry
> > >
> > > On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > yep.
> > > > another one
> > > >
> > > > http://www.pyro.tv/
> > > >
> > > > transcoding your stuff to flash (heck, it even looks ok)
> > > > but then re-hosting.
> > > >
> > > > and i so sick and tired that i'll just let this one slide?
> > > > um no.
> > > > that ain't cool.
> > > >
> > > > SIGH
> > > >
> > > > -ryanne
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > > > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > > > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > > > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > > > --
> > > > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > > > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > > > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > > > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > > > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > > --
> > > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.DavidMeade.com
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[sull]

I think its in part because they want to assure all videos on their site are
flash in order to avoid playback issues with users... and also it provides
them with some deeper viewing stats as well.

They are using on2 flix 
They are using their bandwidth.
Both cost money.
However
The transcoding software is just good tool to have under the hood for a
startup in the video space.
So not a waste of money there.
The bandwidth could also be insignificant until they become "BIG".

I think it comes back to stats and "it just works" perspective.
Keep in mind, few services openly offer flv format like blip does.
If more did so, then we would probably see less rehosting of the flash
format.

Sull

On 4/14/07, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   They seem to be giving attribution and providing direct download links
> to the original file ... downloads will hit blip for stats and links
> will hit feedburner and what not ... but the transcoding still bugs
> me. I wonder why these sites are so determined to eat up their own
> hosting/bandwidth space when they needn't?
>
> They seem to have come close at this site and say on their "publishers"
> page:
>
> "Protecting Your Stuff We are creative types ourselves and understand
> that hollow and angry feeling when someone hijacks your stuff. So we
> provide very visible attribution of your content, which we copy
> completely intact with all beauty you intended. And if you don't want
> your videos on Pyro.TV, we promise to take it down right away"
>
> Sounds like they may be the sort who will be willing to go that last
> mile and stop the "copy" portion of their plan and just use the
> content we're already distributing in the feed.
>
> ... here's hoping. :-)
>
> - Dave
>
>
> On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > i'm referring them to the vertigo aggregator best practices
> >
> > http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/
> >
> > though i'm not seeing on there
> > a specific clause about transcoding and re-hosting
> > other than this phrase:
> >
> > "Aggregators should always conduct video playback in the video's
> original
> > player, rather than the aggregator's player."
> >
> > i don't think that's specific enough..
> > that says original player, not original format.
> > technically would that be considered the same thing?
> >
> > because quicktime just has one player
> > flash could possibly have different players
> > so i'm a little confused on that wording.
> >
> > -ry
> >
> > On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > yep.
> > > another one
> > >
> > > http://www.pyro.tv/
> > >
> > > transcoding your stuff to flash (heck, it even looks ok)
> > > but then re-hosting.
> > >
> > > and i so sick and tired that i'll just let this one slide?
> > > um no.
> > > that ain't cool.
> > >
> > > SIGH
> > >
> > > -ryanne
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > > --
> > > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > --
> > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://www.DavidMeade.com
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[David Meade]

They seem to be giving attribution and providing direct download links
to the original file ... downloads will hit blip for stats and links
will hit feedburner and what not ... but the transcoding still bugs
me.  I wonder why these sites are so determined to eat up their own
hosting/bandwidth space when they needn't?

They seem to have come close at this site and say on their "publishers" page:

"Protecting Your Stuff We are creative types ourselves and understand
that hollow and angry feeling when someone hijacks your stuff. So we
provide very visible attribution of your content, which we copy
completely intact with all beauty you intended. And if you don't want
your videos on Pyro.TV, we promise to take it down right away"

Sounds like they may be the sort who will be willing to go that last
mile and stop the "copy" portion of their plan and just use the
content we're already distributing in the feed.

... here's hoping. :-)

- Dave

On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm referring them to the vertigo aggregator best practices
>
> http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/
>
> though i'm not seeing on there
> a specific clause about transcoding and re-hosting
> other than this phrase:
>
> "Aggregators should always conduct video playback in the video's original
> player, rather than the aggregator's player."
>
> i don't think that's specific enough..
> that says original player, not original format.
> technically would that be considered the same thing?
>
> because quicktime just has one player
> flash could possibly have different players
> so i'm a little confused on that wording.
>
> -ry
>
> On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > yep.
> > another one
> >
> > http://www.pyro.tv/
> >
> > transcoding your stuff to flash (heck, it even looks ok)
> > but then re-hosting.
> >
> > and i so sick and tired that i'll just let this one slide?
> > um no.
> > that ain't cool.
> >
> > SIGH
> >
> > -ryanne
> >
> > --
> > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > --
> > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> --
> Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


-- 
http://www.DavidMeade.com

Re: [videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[sull]

I actually ended up stopping by this site a few days ago.
I think it was mentioned in some article i read.
Funny thing is, they have the exact same tagline as one of the sites I
worked on.

But yeah, they are giving you attribution but they are definately re-hosting
a newly transcoded flv file:
http://www.pyro.tv/media/4/sharedmedia/6/40/10/5075_416572.mp4.flv

Sull


On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   i'm referring them to the vertigo aggregator best practices
>
> http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/
>
> though i'm not seeing on there
> a specific clause about transcoding and re-hosting
> other than this phrase:
>
> "Aggregators should always conduct video playback in the video's original
> player, rather than the aggregator's player."
>
> i don't think that's specific enough..
> that says original player, not original format.
> technically would that be considered the same thing?
>
> because quicktime just has one player
> flash could possibly have different players
> so i'm a little confused on that wording.
>
> -ry
>
>
> On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > yep.
> > another one
> >
> > http://www.pyro.tv/
> >
> > transcoding your stuff to flash (heck, it even looks ok)
> > but then re-hosting.
> >
> > and i so sick and tired that i'll just let this one slide?
> > um no.
> > that ain't cool.
> >
> > SIGH
> >
> > -ryanne
> >
> > --
> > Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> > American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> > From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> > http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> > --
> > Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> > Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> > Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> > iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
>
> --
> Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> --
> Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff

[ryanne hodson]

i'm referring them to the vertigo aggregator best practices

http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/

though i'm not seeing on there
a specific clause about transcoding and re-hosting
other than this phrase:

"Aggregators should always conduct video playback in the video's original
player, rather than the aggregator's player."

i don't think that's specific enough..
that says original player, not original format.
technically would that be considered the same thing?

because quicktime just has one player
flash could possibly have different players
so i'm a little confused on that wording.

-ry

On 4/14/07, ryanne hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> yep.
> another one
>
> http://www.pyro.tv/
>
> transcoding your stuff to flash (heck, it even looks ok)
> but then re-hosting.
>
> and i so sick and tired that i'll just let this one slide?
> um no.
> that ain't cool.
>
> SIGH
>
> -ryanne
>
> --
> Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
> American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
> From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
> http://pixelodeonfest.com/
> --
> Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
> Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
> Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
> Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
> iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo




-- 
Pixelodeon-June 9th & 10th
American Film Institute (AFI) LA, CA
>From the Computer Screen to the Big Screen
http://pixelodeonfest.com/
-- 
Author of Secrets of Videoblogging >http://tinyurl.com/me4vs
Me > http://RyanEdit.com, http://RyanIsHungry.com
Educate > http://FreeVlog.org, http://Node101.org
Community Capitalism> http://HaveMoneyWillVlog.com
iChat/AIM > VideoRodeo


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]