Comments on: YouTube Not Built on Big Media’s Back?

By: For Music and News Industries, Power is Now With the People | The Future Buzz

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:18:48 +0000

[...] results of the new study only bolster our previous argument that YouTube is not built by big media. Liz Gannes puts it best when she says, “So maybe YouTube really is about the long tail, the little guy, and the lonely girl.” I think [...]

By: RazorSharp iPods & Raw Gadgets » Blog Archive » Forget YouTube: Go To These Sites If You Want Hard Core Copyright Infringing Content

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:09:20 +0000

[...] site on the web. But limits on video length, DMCA takedown notices and billion dollar lawsuits have damaged YouTube’s ability to facilitate serious copyright infringement. The smaller guys are now [...]

By: Media Cool Hunting » Blog Archive » Links from last week

Media Cool Hunting » Blog Archive » Links from last week — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:57:29 +0000

[...] YouTube Not Built on Big Media’s Back? So maybe YouTube really is about the long tail, the little guy, and the lonely girl. [...]

By: Tony Evans

Tony Evans — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 09:01:07 +0000

It is surprising how few copyrighted clips are out there on youtube and it goes to show the justification of apple in removing its DRM. If music could be sold for less than the equilvalent of a days pay, as they do on itunes, then people would buy their products.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 06:36:47 +0000

Liz, I think you’ve got it right. This isn’t the final word, but an basis for a general approximation.

By: Liz Gannes

Liz Gannes — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 22:58:21 +0000

doug, think you’ll be interested in a post I’m putting up tonight. :)

By: doug

doug — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 22:49:55 +0000

Liz,

I agree totally. I would really like a lot more detailed usage data about that remaining 90%. How much of the non-copyright content is viewed by significant numbers or are we talking about small personal groups. Groups that would be private if the wide open internet were not the medium. Family & Friends in other words.

Can family and friends be considered a long tail niche is my main question. I'm not sure it should be. But, I'm certainly ready to change my opinion based on better data.

By: TechCrunch Japanese アーカイブ » ハードコアな著作権侵害コンテンツを見たいなら、YouTubeなど忘れてこちらをどうぞ

TechCrunch Japanese アーカイブ » ハードコアな著作権侵害コンテンツを見たいなら、YouTubeなど忘れてこちらをどうぞ — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 21:45:44 +0000

[...] YouTubeは明らかにウェブ上で最も人気の高い動画共有サイト。しかし、動画コンテンツの再生時間制限、DMCAからのコンテンツ取り下げ要求それに10億ドルに及ぶ損害賠償請求訴訟などで、YouTubeの深刻な著作権侵害を行う能力はダメージを受けた。しかし、より規模の小さなサイトがその隙間を埋めるため進出している。 [...]

By: The Media Age

The Media Age — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:57:34 +0000

[...] Report that everyone is using to claim that the YouTube/Viacom lawsuit is baloney (see 1, 2, 3,4). This is some of the worst misappropriation of non-scientific findings I have seen in a [...]

By: Liz Gannes

Liz Gannes — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:39:03 +0000

This study is hardly the final word, but I do think it's meaningful. Ideally this would be for all of YouTube and for all of the last year, prior to the Google purchase when you could find nearly anything you wanted on YouTube.

A bigger sample would bring in things like the Daily Show, where lots of bits and pieces get posted all the time, but the number of views per clip wouldn't approach something timeless like SNL's Dick in a Box.

As for concerns about 'the long tail,' I do think YouTube still addresses the needs of people who are trying to find an audience, however small it might be. doug, I don't think this necessarily means that the rest of the clips on the site are solely personal, because personal to me means private. I would love to know how many clips have a total of one view, though.

By: Multimedias.mobi » Forget YouTube: Go To These Sites If You Want Hard Core Copyright Infringing Content

Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:32:16 +0000

By: Mark Williams

Mark Williams — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:20:55 +0000

Its so hard to know when CR infringement is taken seriously – made a book trailer for Print on Demand (POD)book – took ages finding a Bruce Springsteen Creative Commons image for use in it and still got a complaint.

http://tinyurl.com/32jdkf

By: jlewin

jlewin — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:14:04 +0000

Liz

Since you're hyping this study - does it meant that you think the long tail isn't relevant to YouTube?

Some questions you should be asking:

Is this a representative sampling?

Did Vidmeter capture a significant portion of the videos on YouTube?

Do you really think the removed video list represents the traffic generated by copyrighted content?

The ultimate question, though, is whether or not content creators should be able to control who tacks adds onto their work, - the Vidmeter info seems irrelevant.

By: Kyle Redinger

Kyle Redinger — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 14:04:23 +0000

Does this change the fundamental copyright issue associated with the site? http://themediaage.com/?p=30

By: Jerry Jerryson

Jerry Jerryson — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 13:21:33 +0000

My bum hurts.

By: gzino

gzino — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:58:47 +0000

Haven’t read the Vidmeter report yet, but the conclusions seems potentially skewed:
1. By definition, if a video is taken down then it won’t get as many hits, and viewers will go to other sites to view them. So much of the data could be comparing hits on videos that are up for months compared to videos up for days (before they are taken down).
2. Only a small percentage of overall big media videos are requested to be taken down. There is plenty of big media in the top 100 for any given day that is not requested to be taken down, and it seems like those videos would fall into the “non big media” bucket in these stats?