A friend shared the Thai clip on Facebook. I failed to “like” it, so when I wanted to show it to my husband, I couldn’t find it.
Thus began the journey that led to my discovering this video. I channeled my inner terrier, but it was “search” that I had my teeth sunk into, not a squirrel or a rat or a bone.
“Asian Vitruvian Man” was shot in Taipei and uploaded October 28, 2011. Knock-offs are spreading like wildfire . Not a single one that I’ve seen credits the source.
Here’s the relevant info from the standard YouTube license:
6. Your Content and Conduct
B. … You affirm, represent, and warrant that you own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions to publish Content you submit; and you license to YouTube all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to such Content for publication on the Service pursuant to these Terms of Service.
C. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license…
That’s clear, right? We are free to share (embed, link to) a YouTube clip but unless the poster changes the terms, we can’t duplicate it.
In fact, YouTube makes it pretty darn easy to share content. That’s how it got traction in its youth (as well as its solving the “what format video should I upload” problem).
Why doesn’t Google police its own content farm (YouTube) and protect rank-and-file members from encroachment with the same vigor that it uses when faced with questionable take-down notices? Oh, I know the answer. Lawyers.
Funny, though. At least two purveyors of copied video are profit-making entities — one of them owned by Clear Channel!
You and I both know that appropriating digital content isn’t the same as theft in the real world. Atoms aren’t easily duplicated, which makes them less sharable.
But sharing without credit is still intellectual theft. Appropriating someone’s video is not unlike plagiarism. And it’s also real theft if the source is making money on YouTube clip views.
First, share original content. Use your head! Sometimes that’s as simple as clicking a “via” or “reblogged from” link.
Second, don’t appropriate someone else’s content, fail to give credit. If the site makes it easy to embed, then embed. Don’t download a copy and re-upload it as though it’s your own stuff.
Aside: my standard mantra — if it seems too good or too bad to be true, double-check before posting — always stands.
- 8 March 2014: 294,356 shares; 27 likes.
Name not replicable; Bangkok, via Facebook.
- 13 March 2014: 58 shares
Daily Motion. Dailymotion is the most popular European web site, period. They know better. And they’re making money on their site.
- 15 March 2014: 109,994 shares; 14,986 likes.
KJR 95.7 radio, Seattle, via Facebook video. KRJ is owned by Clear Channel Media and Entertainment. They know better.
Known for gnawing at complex questions like a terrier with a bone. Digital evangelist, writer, teacher. Transplanted Southerner; teach newbies to ride motorcycles. @kegill (Twitter and Mastodon.social); wiredpen.com