4 ms·

[inflammatory comment] So following that logic car manufacturers are responsible for all the car accidents in history; its their users, they should check that t

[inflammatory comment] So following that logic car manufacturers are responsible for all the car accidents in history; its their users, they should check that the person is able and fit to use their service (car). It just makes me mad. It's just a bad precedent.

Tichy 15y ago
I'd argue that car manufacturers are indeed part responsible for car accidents.
- Tichy 15y ago
  Oh yeah - guns don't kill people, people do...
jlujan 15y ago
This is the same as saying gun manufactures have liability in any murder committed with their product which many argue, they have not done enough to prevent the wrong people from getting firearms. But it is the wrong analogy. In sites like youtube, it is more like a property owner that rents a building and is aware of his tenants performing illegal activity on a regular basis. Which depending on the crimes and the amount of knowledge could make the property owner liable or even an accessory. But all of this leads to the same arguments and worthless discussion about semantics. The correct discussion is what value we place on media as a society. The easiest way to solve this is to stop supporting artists on major labels. Advances in technology have lowered the barrier to entry in recorded music to a widely attainable level. Artists trade the rights to their music to labels for the label's marketing and distribution. Now days, interesting things go viral with little to no marketing effort and there is no argument that the labels are decades behind in their distribution channels. Even if you wan to avoid iTunes or other services, It is relatively easy for a moderately tech savvy individual to push a digital album to S3 or the likes, link to it from a static site and serve millions of downloads. Could even get fancy and deploy a web store template from godaddy for taking payments. Yeah, it might take some learning but so does negotiating a 100 page recording contract... ask Aerosmith. We can't keep bashing labels for defending/protecting their aging distribution channels. You can't blame a dog for acting like a dog. We can create truly disruptive new distribution channels with better terms for artists and go head to head with the labels.
rhplus 15y ago
I'm probably in a very small minority here, but given that Google is making money by placing ads next to most YouTube content, then yes, perhaps they are responsible for determining who actually owns the content first.
- nkassis 15y ago
  They do and they share the revenues with companies that claim to own the copyright. They even check videos and proactively decide who the ad revenues should go too. Sometimes their fingerprinting tool does make mistake (thinking bird sounds are copyrighted music by some copyright troll was an example recently).

Tichy 15y ago

I'd argue that car manufacturers are indeed part responsible for car accidents.

Tichy 15y ago
Oh yeah - guns don't kill people, people do...

jlujan 15y ago

This is the same as saying gun manufactures have liability in any murder committed with their product which many argue, they have not done enough to prevent the wrong people from getting firearms. But it is the wrong analogy. In sites like youtube, it is more like a property owner that rents a building and is aware of his tenants performing illegal activity on a regular basis. Which depending on the crimes and the amount of knowledge could make the property owner liable or even an accessory. But all of this leads to the same arguments and worthless discussion about semantics. The correct discussion is what value we place on media as a society. The easiest way to solve this is to stop supporting artists on major labels. Advances in technology have lowered the barrier to entry in recorded music to a widely attainable level. Artists trade the rights to their music to labels for the label's marketing and distribution. Now days, interesting things go viral with little to no marketing effort and there is no argument that the labels are decades behind in their distribution channels. Even if you wan to avoid iTunes or other services, It is relatively easy for a moderately tech savvy individual to push a digital album to S3 or the likes, link to it from a static site and serve millions of downloads. Could even get fancy and deploy a web store template from godaddy for taking payments. Yeah, it might take some learning but so does negotiating a 100 page recording contract... ask Aerosmith. We can't keep bashing labels for defending/protecting their aging distribution channels. You can't blame a dog for acting like a dog. We can create truly disruptive new distribution channels with better terms for artists and go head to head with the labels.

rhplus 15y ago

I'm probably in a very small minority here, but given that Google is making money by placing ads next to most YouTube content, then yes, perhaps they are responsible for determining who actually owns the content first.

nkassis 15y ago
They do and they share the revenues with companies that claim to own the copyright. They even check videos and proactively decide who the ad revenues should go too. Sometimes their fingerprinting tool does make mistake (thinking bird sounds are copyrighted music by some copyright troll was an example recently).