That's the first thing to keep in mind.
The service achieves its goals without the 'blog' component.
Vloggers should simply understand that it is not the best suited service for the vlog medium.
Of course, if one doesnt care either way... then that's the end of that. If you do care, then all the points Verdi brings up should be comprehended.
Why do people use it? It's pretty easy to do and many dont care about terms or any of the other issues.
Or, it is a temporary solution or even just for experimenting.
As for others uploading video that is not theirs to upload.... YouTube is protected, but you may go after the user who did upload your media and work with them etcetera....
YouTube should provide an easy way to be a mediator is such situations and offer to remove any such media within a fair time frame.... and at least reply to parties within a few business days.
B. You shall be solely responsible for your own User Submissions and the consequences of posting or publishing them. In connection with User Submissions, you affirm, represent and/or warrant that: (i) you own, or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions to use and authorize YouTube to use, all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to any and all User Submissions to enable inclusion and use of the User Submissions in the manner contemplated by the Website and these Terms of Service;
Regarding aggregators.... yes and is why all people who want to syndicate vodcasts must understand that they need to make available other downloadable formats in addition to using flash video for the web (blog).
We all can agree that this is a very good aproach to take... VSocial works this way.... and as Bill pointed out earlier today, he is doing this so he can continue to encode higher quality videos for syndicating but lower quality/size videos (flv) for the web audience... with the nice result of assuring all of the web audience will be able to play the video, as flash player is just about always installed on client side.
Many people will use desktop aggregators.... especially other vloggers and heavy subscribers. I think we'll also see many within the general Internet Video audience who will just use the web and/or email.
sull
On 1/24/06, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't know the YouTube people and I don't have anything against them personally, but I wish they would change some things about their service. So I'm writing this in the hope that it will generate some back and forth conversation that they might consider. I'm also writing this to try to understand where people who use YouTube are coming from because Ryanne and I are starting to talk about changes and updates to Freevlog and we get lots of "new vlog" emails pointing to YouTube user pages or Blogger blogs full of YouTube video.
So my basic issues with the service as it is right now are:
1. The Terms of Use. Specifically, "For clarity, you shall retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. However, by submitting the User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, fully paid-up, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, perform and otherwise exploit the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its successor's) business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels." The way I read that is you are giving them the right to do whatever they want with your work - even profit from it or licensce it to someone else - without necessarily including you in the deal. Am I misinterpreting this?
2. The other issue I have with YouTube is that videos don't work in an aggregator like FireAnt. I think this is a really important issue. As we get more and more vlog content online and as more people become comfortable using RSS, aggregators will (they are this for me now) be the primary way of interacting with videoblogs for many people.
Personally I would also like to see that logo disappear from everyone's video and for the videos to work on mobile devices but they're not dealbreakers.
If YouTube allowed you to select a license - copyright, creative commons, whatever - and they respected it and if the videos would work in an aggregator we could quit discouraging people from using it. In the end I don't care where people host their media I just wonder why people are choosing YouTube given these issues. So for you YouTube users out there, why do you use it? I know some people like Bill (Lo-Fi STL) were using it as a free Flash transcoder while still offering a quicktime download link and an RSS feed. I can get that. What about others? Is it that you didn't know about the issues I bring up? Or maybe those issues aren't important to you? Or is there something else about the service that gives it value for you?
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Verdi
--
Me: http://michaelverdi.com
R&D: http://evilvlog.com
Learn to videoblog: http://freevlog.org
Learn to videoblog in person: http://node101.org
SPONSORED LINKS
Individual Fireant Use Explains
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service .
--
sull
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"The hybrid or the meeting of two media is a moment of truth and revelation from which new form is born"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://vlogdir.com - The Videoblog Directory
http://videobloggers.org - Free Videoblog Hosting / Vlogosphere Aggregator
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
