4 ms·

YouTube chooses to only guess who the creator is, because that's convenient for their business model. There are other choices available to them, they weren't f

YouTube chooses to only guess who the creator is, because that's convenient for their business model. There are other choices available to them, they weren't forced into this one. They chose it because it's easy for them, and most importantly, it allows them in rapidly increase the amount of user-generated content they offer.

Kalium 12y ago
There is no reliable way to know who a creator is while still allowing general user uploads.
- WillNotDownvote 12y ago
  Of course there is. It's just slower and more cumbersome than YouTube would like to deal with, for the sake of their business model.
  - Kalium 12y ago
    Really? What is it? Are you thinking of using humans? Bear in mind that determining the legal status of a given bit of IP is generally the slow and expensive work of a squadron of attorneys.
    - WillNotDownvote 12y ago
      That's exactly what I have in mind. And it's entirely possible to do. That fact that it's slow and expensive is only an issue because it conflicts with YouTube's business model. Frankly, that's YouTube's problem.
      - Kalium 12y ago
        It's a problem that derives from the complexity of copyright law. The result is that the only way to be certain renders user-generated content sites completely unworkable. If your intent is to have a chilling effect on free speech on the internet, requiring a huge and messy legal process to publish something is a good way to do it.
      - 6stringmerc 12y ago
        "In technology-land, it's unethical to not give companies the content they want on the terms they want. Because their service is the most important thing in the world. I know that sounds sarcastic, but it's actually how a lot of technology firms behave and speak." - Kalium's Argument, Paraphrased
        Kalium 12y ago
        I don't know any tech people or companies who believe that about their services. I know a lot of artists who do. Unscientific sample, obviously. I'm also not arguing that Zoe should accept what YouTube is offering. Just that YouTube isn't obligated to offer her want she wants. Tell you what. Want to start a company offering distribution services to artists on the terms they want? Sounds like your kind of thing. I'm sure artists, publishers, labels, and customers will all love it and shower it with money.
        6stringmerc 12y ago
        I already have one that I pay for out of my own pocket, it's called DistroKid, and it's wonderful. So, no, I'll stick to the business of creating things, sharpening my National Forensics League trained debate skills in forums such as this, and reminding myself that I do these from my soul. I gain absolutely nothing by engaging with you, other than heartache at the state of affairs in this world, but it comes from within and I choose to embrace who I am. I hope Zoe succeeds in whatever she does, and applaud her for trying, especially in the face of hostility such as yours.
        Kalium 12y ago
        My heart also aches at the state of affairs in intellectual property law. It's a terrible system from top to bottom that serves mostly to suppress creativity. It badly needs to be re-engineered, but there are far too many vested interests to make that practical. I haven't thought back to Forensics in a very, very long time. Geez. If you think my attitude is hostility, then I submit that you could stand to benefit by reading my comments more carefully. EDIT: Also, DistroKid doesn't allow me to set my own terms. It doesn't look like what I proposed at all.

Kalium 12y ago

There is no reliable way to know who a creator is while still allowing general user uploads.

WillNotDownvote 12y ago
Of course there is. It's just slower and more cumbersome than YouTube would like to deal with, for the sake of their business model.
- Kalium 12y ago
  Really? What is it? Are you thinking of using humans? Bear in mind that determining the legal status of a given bit of IP is generally the slow and expensive work of a squadron of attorneys.
  - WillNotDownvote 12y ago
    That's exactly what I have in mind. And it's entirely possible to do. That fact that it's slow and expensive is only an issue because it conflicts with YouTube's business model. Frankly, that's YouTube's problem.
    - Kalium 12y ago
      It's a problem that derives from the complexity of copyright law. The result is that the only way to be certain renders user-generated content sites completely unworkable. If your intent is to have a chilling effect on free speech on the internet, requiring a huge and messy legal process to publish something is a good way to do it.
    - 6stringmerc 12y ago
      "In technology-land, it's unethical to not give companies the content they want on the terms they want. Because their service is the most important thing in the world. I know that sounds sarcastic, but it's actually how a lot of technology firms behave and speak." - Kalium's Argument, Paraphrased
      - Kalium 12y ago
        I don't know any tech people or companies who believe that about their services. I know a lot of artists who do. Unscientific sample, obviously. I'm also not arguing that Zoe should accept what YouTube is offering. Just that YouTube isn't obligated to offer her want she wants. Tell you what. Want to start a company offering distribution services to artists on the terms they want? Sounds like your kind of thing. I'm sure artists, publishers, labels, and customers will all love it and shower it with money.
        6stringmerc 12y ago
        I already have one that I pay for out of my own pocket, it's called DistroKid, and it's wonderful. So, no, I'll stick to the business of creating things, sharpening my National Forensics League trained debate skills in forums such as this, and reminding myself that I do these from my soul. I gain absolutely nothing by engaging with you, other than heartache at the state of affairs in this world, but it comes from within and I choose to embrace who I am. I hope Zoe succeeds in whatever she does, and applaud her for trying, especially in the face of hostility such as yours.
        Kalium 12y ago
        My heart also aches at the state of affairs in intellectual property law. It's a terrible system from top to bottom that serves mostly to suppress creativity. It badly needs to be re-engineered, but there are far too many vested interests to make that practical. I haven't thought back to Forensics in a very, very long time. Geez. If you think my attitude is hostility, then I submit that you could stand to benefit by reading my comments more carefully. EDIT: Also, DistroKid doesn't allow me to set my own terms. It doesn't look like what I proposed at all.