4 ms·

this isn't a case that can be framed in terms of Facebook stealing from YouTube. Just like when YouTube users stole from movie and music publishers, this is Fac

this isn't a case that can be framed in terms of Facebook stealing from YouTube. Just like when YouTube users stole from movie and music publishers, this is Facebook users stealing from YouTube "content creators". All this talk of "so what, YouTube did it too" for a start doesn't excuse the law but more to the point, it disguises the fact that YT arent the ones who are suffering from the consequences of this trend - publishers using it as a platform are. By bringing up Facebooks privacy policy you are adding nothing to the discussion of the culture of FB users stealing YouTube users' videos sans accreditation.

AdieuToLogic 11y ago
> Just like when YouTube users stole from movie and music publishers, this is Facebook users stealing from YouTube "content creators". My point exactly. > All this talk of "so what, YouTube did it too" ... I didn't say "so what." I said Youtube became the billion dollar acquisition it was by doing exactly what Facebook is doing to them. I believe the appropriate term is "Quid Pro Quo." > ... it disguises the fact that YT arent the ones who are suffering from the consequences of this trend - publishers using it as a platform are. Cannot the same thing be said to the people employed by content producers such as Viacom et al? When Youtube used the same "we'll take this stuff down, but drag our heels doing it" tactics Facebook is doing now, were not real artists impacted? How is "publishers using it as a platform" in any way different than "publishers using Viacom as a platform?" > By bringing up Facebooks privacy policy you are adding nothing to the discussion of the culture of FB users stealing YouTube users' videos sans accreditation. I brought up Facebook's "Terms of Service" because I find it repugnant. If you don't see it that way, so be it. If you are so ardently dedicated to this cause, why not follow the path of Metallica[1]? 1 - http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35670 http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35670

AdieuToLogic 11y ago

> Just like when YouTube users stole from movie and music publishers, this is Facebook users stealing from YouTube "content creators". My point exactly. > All this talk of "so what, YouTube did it too" ... I didn't say "so what." I said Youtube became the billion dollar acquisition it was by doing exactly what Facebook is doing to them. I believe the appropriate term is "Quid Pro Quo." > ... it disguises the fact that YT arent the ones who are suffering from the consequences of this trend - publishers using it as a platform are. Cannot the same thing be said to the people employed by content producers such as Viacom et al? When Youtube used the same "we'll take this stuff down, but drag our heels doing it" tactics Facebook is doing now, were not real artists impacted? How is "publishers using it as a platform" in any way different than "publishers using Viacom as a platform?" > By bringing up Facebooks privacy policy you are adding nothing to the discussion of the culture of FB users stealing YouTube users' videos sans accreditation. I brought up Facebook's "Terms of Service" because I find it repugnant. If you don't see it that way, so be it. If you are so ardently dedicated to this cause, why not follow the path of Metallica[1]? 1 - http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35670 http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35670