Archive Page Design
Click here to go to Balletco's new home page and site navigation

About the Change
HomeMagazineListingsUpdateLinksContexts

 


 Ballet.co Postings Pages

 Some Special Threads:
  TodaysLinks - worldwide daily dance links
  KirovTalk talk about the Kirov
  BolshoiTalk talk about the Bolshoi
  Ballet.co GetTogethers - meetings and drinks...




Ballet.co Postings

Subject: "Youtube links?"     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy     Email this topic to a friend    
Conferences About us Topic #434
Reading Topic #434
Ian Graham

18-04-07, 08:10 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Ian%20Graham Click to send private message to Ian%20Graham Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
"Youtube links?"
 
   Are we permitted to post links to youtube on this site?

I know there are strict rules about 'links' but I am not sure about this one.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

  Subject     Author     Message Date     ID  
  RE: Youtube links? Jenny_Taylor 21-04-07 1
     RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 22-04-07 3
  RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 22-04-07 2
     RE: Youtube links? DaveM 22-04-07 4
         RE: Youtube links? Anjuli_Bai 22-04-07 5
             RE: Youtube links? ingve 23-04-07 6
                 RE: Youtube links? Anjuli_Bai 23-04-07 7
                     RE: Youtube links? Robert 24-04-07 8
                         RE: Youtube links? ian_palmermoderator 24-04-07 9
                             RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 24-04-07 17
                         RE: Youtube links? DaveM 24-04-07 10
                     RE: Youtube links? Eric Taub 24-04-07 11
                         RE: Youtube links? Anjuli_Bai 24-04-07 12
                             RE: Youtube links? Eric Taub 24-04-07 13
                                 RE: Youtube links? Anjuli_Bai 24-04-07 14
                         RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 24-04-07 19
     RE: Youtube links? Ian Graham 24-04-07 15
         RE: Youtube links? Robert 24-04-07 16
             RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 24-04-07 18
         RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 24-04-07 20
             RE: Youtube links? gunleik 25-04-07 21
                 RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 25-04-07 22
                     RE: Youtube links? ingve 25-04-07 23
                         RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 25-04-07 24
                             RE: Youtube links? ingve 25-04-07 25
                                 RE: Youtube links? DaveM 25-04-07 26
                                     RE: Youtube links? Robert 25-04-07 27
                                     RE: Youtube links? Bruceadmin 25-04-07 28
                                     RE: Youtube links? Robert 26-04-07 29
  RE: Youtube links? ian_palmermoderator 26-04-07 30

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Jenny_Taylor

21-04-07, 08:06 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Jenny_Taylor Click to send private message to Jenny_Taylor Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #0
 
   I'd be interested in the ethics of this too, there are some very interesting finds on Youtube.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

22-04-07, 04:19 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #1
 
   >I'd be interested in the ethics of this too, there are some
>very interesting finds on Youtube.

The ethics stink really!


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

22-04-07, 04:17 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
2. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #0
 
  
YouTube is a nightmare with much ripped off material. Some studios are taking them through the courts and rightly so I think. It costs money/time/energy to do original things and if somebody just steals it for free and republishes it for free that seems entirely wrong. Although its a massive site, and does massive trade, that doen't make any of it right and we've long had a view that we don't like to see links to what is illegally obtained and proffered material.

All that said I've been thinking about the policy in a world where people routinly steal and others enjoy the benefits and see things they would not otherwise. The great thing about our existing policy is that its straighforward and if we start linking to illegal material then people might feel its fine to steal from us for example.

I'm interested in wider views on this because it's a headache frankly... one wants to cover what is happening but one doesn't want to condone blatant theft.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
DaveM

22-04-07, 04:28 PM (BST)
Click to EMail DaveM Click to send private message to DaveM Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
4. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #2
 
   My 2p worth - if people want to visit and browse through Youtube looking for (probably half-inched) ballet clips, well, that's up to them. Everyone knows where it is, so don't think putting links on ballet.co to them is a sound idea.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Anjuli_Bai

22-04-07, 05:04 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Anjuli_Bai Click to send private message to Anjuli_Bai Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
5. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #4
 
   It makes me really angry when I see stuff I've written stolen - without my knowledge, without my consent and with someone else's name on top of it. ARGH!!!

On several occasions I've googled something for information, and something I've written on this site comes up on another site, without attribution and without a link back to the original source, without having asked my permission.

If possible I do write to the "thief" and ask him/her/them to both attribute the work to me as well as provide a link back to the original source.

In some instances the "thief" has complied - but much of time he/she/it does not and just ignores my e-mail.

I don't see the possibilities the internet affords to do this sort of thing as an excuse to do it.

If the author owns the copyright to the materiial and the administrators of the boards in question know the material is being used on two different sites - that's another matter. And even then there should be link back to the other site.

The ability to do something is not an excuse to do it.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ingve

23-04-07, 07:25 AM (BST)
Click to EMail ingve Click to send private message to ingve Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
6. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #5
 
   Hi there,

I understand all the critic you have of youtube and similar places, and will respect that from now.

Even if you have my understanding, I do not really agree to the complete rejection of youtube and its possibilities.

For example.
I once had a ballet director and choreographer with a certain fame. He was always charmed to death when he went around and saw performances in other theatres with other choreographers who had taken not only ideas and concept of his performances, but even copied music and steps.

This does not make it right, be he felt confirmed that he did things right. He was anyway not affraid. The ones who need to copy comes and goes, this man has now been directing and choreographing for almost 40 years and he is still creating new pieces.

I also think dancers choreographers and teachers should look around in other art forms a bit more.
Imagine if The Beatles, Prince, Bob Dylan, The Weather Girls, Mozart, Grieg, Beethoven, ......would have the same fobia of getting copied and plyed in "the wrong way" from "incompetent musicians" who does not respect their work, as choreographers and teachers are making it impossible for people to get access to their work. They would never have staid famous, they could never have sold any score books or similar.
Maybe someone would play their song on a village party without paying the royalties, (I do not know if this is what it is called in english when you pay for performing other artists work) they would have been for long time forgotten.

Dance and dancers, choreography and choreographers, are so protected and cept in a a small community so no one actually know anything about us.

I am not dancing myself anymore and I am now dealing a lot with people who have never been into dance,not even close, and I am really having to face the consequences of our protection politics.

Just yesterday I got to hear this in a TV show:

Situation-
a singer has performed in a competition and are going back stage to wait for the result.

The moderater tells him:
"ok, go back stage, there are some beautiful (female) dancers there, I am sure they will give you a nice massage"

Why does he automatically think that a dancer (female) is automatically a competent masseuse. Or does he just not know ANYTHING about dancers ond our work. All he see i is a well trained woman, and wich man would not like to touched by one "like that"

This is just a small thing appart from all the people asking what the dancers they see on the films I am making are doing at daytime etc. (but this lack of knowledge of dance and dancers we already have accepted)

I could go on like this... I will not!

So, yes
Youtube is a monster business!
Youtube is not a charity center!
Youtube is breaking a lot of rules!

But I cannot agree to real youtube denial. Youtube and similars are online to stay. I would find it better to relate to it and find a way of using its advantages than saying "it is bad, it is nothing I have to or want to deal with"

I will retire now, and if this posting is inapropriate, please delete. I have respect for your forum, the work and effort you put into it and do not want to disturb if my point of view do not fit the politics of your very good board.

Ingve


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Anjuli_Bai

23-04-07, 04:04 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Anjuli_Bai Click to send private message to Anjuli_Bai Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
7. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #6
 
   >>>>>>The Beatles, Prince, Bob Dylan, The Weather Girls, Mozart, Grieg, Beethoven, ......would have the same fobia of getting copied and plyed in "the wrong way" from "incompetent musicians" who does not respect their work, as choreographers and teachers are making it impossible for people to get access to their work.>>>>>>

There are several issues here. It's not about a "fobia" (phobia) - or fear of any kind. It's about honesty. When someone uses my work without my permission - it's not that I want to be paid (that would be nice) but its about using my work without asking me. I have never refused - well, ok, only once I did. Someone asked me if he could use my choreography - but wanted to put his name on it! That's the only time I said "no." But I DO want to be asked.

As for Mozart, Grieg and Beethoven - their work is in the public domain. Copyrighted work is protected for a certain number of years and can be renewed by the creator of the work or his/her heirs. I am sure the rules are different for each country. When the copyright is not renewed the creation goes into the "public domain" and anyone can use it. However, were someone to claim something like Mozart's 21st piano concerto as his own - that person would become a laughing stock.

Stealing someone's work - using it without permission - is the same thing as stealing someone's car, or a house they built by themselves. It belongs to that person and if you want to take or use it - you need to ask permission and/or buy it.

As for dancers and others "looking around" at other art forms - good dancers, teachers, choreographers, composers, writers do that all the time. Only a foolish person remains locked up within their own little closet.

Dancers are very busy and often very tired as well as beholden to a strict schedule and its easy to get locked into a small world - but good dancers don't allow this to happen.

It shouldn't be assumed that they do. Dancers today are educated, observant, interested in other things beside their own dancing and often go on to other careers after retirement. They are used to dancing to all kinds of music and often quite proficient in several types of dancing.

I don't think anyone here is afraid of YouTube - but its just one of many things online or in life in general that has to be seen and used judiciously - an excerpt - a piece - not a complete picture.

It's only one offer in a buffet of food - a fast food restaurant in a huge assortment of possible places to eat.

But, Bruce's point is well taken.....if I use something that someone else stole then I am complicit in the act. There's actually a law about that called "aiding and abetting." If I buy or use something I know is stolen property - then I am equally guilty.

This is hard to control in a milieu such as the Internet, but that doesn't make it right to do it.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Robert

24-04-07, 02:47 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Robert Click to send private message to Robert Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #7
 
   I have a problem with Utube, it is often too fiddly and complicated to use. I do agree in principal with Anjula and Bruce that if peoples work is being put on without permission or payment it is wrong, but most of the things on it are surely people happily showing off. A model I know and use plays and sings in a band, she gave me a Utube link to hear her, surely nothing wrong in that (apart from the band!!) Today the Prime Minister has contributed a bit on Utube is their anything wrong in that. The snatches of ballet that I have noticed are usually pretty blurred and amateur so I cannot think many would object. For years I danced around the pubs and streets of London with a Morris Dance Team, we were filmed on numerous occasions and I have seen bits of film etc on comedy programmes and sometimes even serious programmes, it would be churlish to object or expect payment. I think we need to keep a sense of proportion.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ian_palmermoderator

24-04-07, 03:36 PM (BST)
Click to EMail ian_palmer Click to send private message to ian_palmer Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #8
 
   Quite. When I interviewed Maria Kocketkova for the magazine, she seemed genuinely pleased that she had so many clips on YouTube.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

24-04-07, 10:10 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
17. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #9
 
   >Quite. When I interviewed Maria Kocketkova for the
>magazine, she seemed genuinely pleased that she had so many
>clips on YouTube.

Er.. but were they her IPR? I suspect not. Also were the images/videos taken at a time when they should not have been?

Obviously if she owns teh videos and chooses to put them on YouTube then that is fine I think.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
DaveM

24-04-07, 03:37 PM (BST)
Click to EMail DaveM Click to send private message to DaveM Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
10. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #8
 
   you're right Robert, about people who post their OWN stuff there - its when people have extracted clips from commercial DVDs or VHS tapes (or music videos, or gigs, or any live performance with a paying audience) that the problems arise. If its your own stuff, its a great way to get seen. If its not your own stuff - then you are basically pinching it! This is why so many venues very strict on not allowing recording equipment in, especially if a commercial recording available or going going to become available. I know i'm on rather thin ice here wrt my curtain call photos on flickr!!

With some of the clips on YouTube - I'm really curious as to HOW they managed to get hold of some of them!! Especially those in rehearsals...


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Eric Taub

24-04-07, 04:03 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Eric%20Taub Click to send private message to Eric%20Taub Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
11. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #7
 
   As Balanchine said, good artists create, great artists steal.

If the great artists of previous centuries had to deal with the wretched, selfish muddle of today's intellectual property laws, many of what we consider to be the great works of Western art would never have been created.

Shakespeare would've been sued into the poorhouse for plagiarizing earlier works to get the plot of Romeo and Juliet, for instance. Philippe Taglioni would've bankrupted Bournonville for stealing "La Sylphide." And Taglioni's estate would've similarly crucified Fokine and Diaghilev for "Les Sylphides." Not to mention Petipa's heirs suing anyone who does Sleeping Beauty.

So now we have the somewhat absurd spectacle of Isabel Fokine telling the Maryinsky they must do Polovtsian Dances or The Dying Swan the way she thinks they should be done, or she'll pull their rights to perform them, or Prokofiev's estate forbidding an outré setting of Cinderella.

In the US, the period of copywrite (not registered trademarks, that's different) for a work of art was originally set in the Constitution to 17 years. The idea was to encourage artists and inventors to create new works by allowing them to profit exclusively for a reasonable amount of time, but that then the idea/work would become part of the general intellectual property of all the people -- the public domain -- and we all would be thereby enriched.

Thanks to the self-interest of huge media conglomerates, the concept of copywrite has been perverted so that now for all intents and purposes, new works of art will never go into the public domain. In the old days music belonged to the people -- look at all of Childe's studies of how folk songs would evolve and change over the years and miles -- now music belongs to soulless corporations who will sue you into oblivion for even making copies of music you're legally allowed to mke. But I digress.

Thanks to the tremendous wealth and influence of the Walt Disney corporation, every time the first Mickey Mouse movie, made in the early 1920s, is about to go into public domain, Congress obligingly tacks another few decades onto how long copywrites can last. It's now a ridiculous NINETY YEARS after the death of the creator. The whole purpose of copywrite has been perverted from encouragement for artists and inventors to create works from which we ALL can benefit to a perpetual sinecure for corporations to print money and keep in chains a part of our national soul.

It's particularly disgusting that Disney has taken to mining the public domain for ideas for movies (fairy tales, etc.), so as not to have to pay any licensing fees for newer ideas, while at the same time ensuring that no Disney work of art EVER enters the public domain.

It's the Tragedy of the Commons once more, only its our collective cultural birthright that's being stolen.

Sorry for this rant, which touches only peripherally on YouTube, but it's something I've come to feel very strongly about.

If "big content" had its way, you would NOT be able to copy music or videos to your iPod. You wouldn't be able to record any TV program, for time-shifting or any other purpose. I would have to pay a royalty for actually using the phrase "Mickey Mouse."

Getting back to the dance world, I'll go out on a limb and say it's time Balanchine's works went into the public domain. And Ashton's for that matter.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Anjuli_Bai

24-04-07, 05:28 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Anjuli_Bai Click to send private message to Anjuli_Bai Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
12. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #11
 
   If I create something artistic, and it is something of value, and people like it, and pay for it, and I gain profit from it, and I leave it and the profits from it to my heirs even if I am able to build a "souless corporation" because what I've created is of value because people are willing to buy it....no one has a right to what I created.

You want others to be able to use it without paying me or my heirs? Or use it without my permission? The government's mechanism to protect me - copyright laws - is not a perversion, but a protection to the creator.

Balanchine owned his choreography just as he would have owned a house he designed and built.

If I create something - I have the right to the profits. And I have the right to protection from theft. And I have the right to bequeath it.

I have the right to leave the thing I created and those profits to my heirs and they have the right to use it as they see fit. If one of them doesn't like the way Dying Swan is danced - so be it.

The government has created a mechanism which allows me to claim ownership for a creation or an idea- just like the government has a mechanism for me to claim ownership to my house - a deed to my house. I don't give you my house just because you like it and the house is over a stipulated number of years old. No matter how old the house I built is - it's mine and/or my heirs.

You never have a right to the house I created - built, designed, or bought. It's mine. I can leave it to whomever I wish and they can do as they wish with it. If they decide to rent the house to you - you don't have the right to reconstruct the house. The rental agreement will spell out what you can and cannot do to that house while you occupy it. Same with Dying Swan.

The same with something that is artistically created (a house can be artistically created) or industrially created. You don't have a right to the recipe for Coca-Cola even though it is over 100 years old. You don't have a right to the logo for a brand.

As for there being nothing new under the sun (such as Shakespeare taking the idea of Romeo and Juliet from someone else - there were no copyright laws to protect that orginal creator. Had there been copyright laws at the time, yes indeed, Shakespeare should have asked permission, paid a fee, made note of dual creation - whatever the original creator stipulated.

The fact that copyright eventually runs out after 90 years (or whatever the stipulated number of years are) already presents the possibility of using an extant artistic idea - eventually. I'm not even sure I agree with that as long as there are heirs available.

Because someone wants to use something someone else made, thought of, created - is not a license to do so.

I didn't create Mickey Mouse, I didn't work like Walt Disney did - I wish I had - but I didn't. I don't deserve to use his ideas, or in any way infringe on his souless corporation. The "commons" have no right to any of Disney's products. Sounds like jealousy to me.

The Disney copyrights did not prevent others from creating cartoons, cartoon characters, or theme parks. Copyright does not prevent others from creating - just from stealing.

Balanchine's Trust does not prevent others from creating choreography. If you want to "rent" Balanchine's choreography - you have to abide by the rental agreement. Or go rent somewhere else.

There's lots of creative activity going on in all spheres of art and science.

I would say - because of copyright laws - not despite them.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Eric Taub

24-04-07, 05:53 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Eric%20Taub Click to send private message to Eric%20Taub Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
13. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #12
 
   Well, not to put too fine a point on it, you're just plain wrong.

Copyright (and apparently I can't spell this morning) is not a right which exists in perpetuity, like the right to physical property. Think of it as a limited franchise granted to a creator by the general public, as an incentive for him to create, and with the understanding (take a look at the language in the Constitution) that after this time-limited franchise expires, the work of art, etc., would become available to the general public, that same public which granted the copyright in the first place.

There is not a single intellectual-property attorney in the world who'd agree with your "a ballet is the same as a house" analogy. It's a measure of how much the "big content" corporations have muddied the waters surrounding intellectual property that it's increasingly common these days for people to think that copyrights should exist in perpetuity, when that was never the purpose of any country's concept of copyright.

It is not, and never was, the purpose of copyright to reward a creator's heirs with an open-ended sinecure. The purpose of copyright was, and is, to encourage the creation of new works of art and scholarship by guaranteeing a creator a reasonable (and I emphasize reasonable) return on his labor -- not by granting a creator's heirs, corporate or personal, a perpetual monopoly. Monopolies are, for many reasons, not a good thing, and copyright accepts the necessary evil of monopoly in order to assure the creation of new works of artistic and intellectual merit. The clear intention of the Constitution's writers is that after the expiration of a reasonalbe copyright, ANY creator should be able to use, build on, modify, or otherwise benefit from the original copyright holder's labor. Thus, the intellectual life of society as a whole would benefit.

The recent perversions of copyright law to create absurd, self-perpetuating intellectual fiefdoms (God forbid you should be with a group of people singing "Happy Birthday to You" without paying for a license!) turns the original intention of copyright on its head.

The reason that today we enjoy such a wealth of performing artwork created in the 19th Century is that back then copyright laws hadn't been subverted as they are now. Now we must have absurd spectacles like Isabel Fokine selling "exclusive NYC rights" to Les Sylphides to American Ballet Theatre, which then has the right to prohibit the National Ballet of Cuba from performing Les Sylphides during its 2003 visit to City Center. Which is, patently, absurd.

Yes, Balanchine's works should be in the public domain, if not immediately, than within a couple of decades. If the Balanchine Trust can't attract enough business through the quality of its stagings of Balanchine's works, rather than through the iron fist of its copyright monopoly, then it doesn't deserve to be in business. The works of Balanchine are a particularly bad example to cite in promoting the sanctity of perpetual copyright, as Balanchine himself famously didn't care what happened to his ballets after his death, or perhaps he would've dictated the founding of a Balanchine Trust in his will, rather than divvying up the goods among his closest friends and coworkers.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Anjuli_Bai

24-04-07, 06:16 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Anjuli_Bai Click to send private message to Anjuli_Bai Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list Click to send message via AOL IM  
14. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #13
 
   <<<<Well, not to put too fine a point on it, you're just plain wrong. >>>>


Your point is certainly not fine - but undiplomatically blunt.

I am plain - but wrong is a subjective conclusion. Arguing a point is best done without declarative conclusions on the other's discussant's opinions.

<<<<The works of Balanchine are a particularly bad example to cite in promoting the sanctity of perpetual copyright, as Balanchine himself famously didn't care what happened to his ballets after his death, or perhaps he would've dictated the founding of a Balanchine Trust in his will, rather than divvying up the goods among his closest friends and coworkers.>>>>

I think using Balanchine is a particularly good example. Had he truly not cared he wouldn't have bothered "divvying" up his "goods" - to anyone - good friends, bad friends - strangers. He would not have copyrighted his "goods" at all.

Sorry - can't agree, Eric.

As for reading the Constitution and my understanding of it - I have been a student of the United States Constitution for nigh on 50 years (I'm not only plain but old) (and a copy of it sits right here on the shelf alongside the computer) and though in Section 8 it says "for a limited time" it doesn't say what that limited time should be. Therefore a congress (considered representative of the people) can change that limited time as it sees fit - subject to the will of the people at the next election.

I never said that the Constitution grants unlimited copyright protection - I said I wasn't sure I agreed with it.

The Constitution grants me that right to disagree.



  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

24-04-07, 10:20 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
19. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #11
 
  
You talk about big content and big content providers and they are easier to have a pop at - profit mearsured in millions or hunderds of millions and they just live off teh past and pimp off the creatives etc. I don't see it like that. Regardless of it is is a single photographer haveing his worked ripped off, or a huge corporation, if all that people do is steal material then sooner or later the people who produce the goodies will stop.

It would be really easy to pull together a great website about ballet and dance if all you do is steal your material. That's just wrong. We need a world where peopel add stuff and not steal.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Ian Graham

24-04-07, 08:03 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Ian%20Graham Click to send private message to Ian%20Graham Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
15. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #2
 
   >
>YouTube is a nightmare with much ripped off material. Some
>studios are taking them through the courts and rightly so I
>think.
>I'm interested in wider views on this because it's a
>headache frankly... one wants to cover what is happening but
>one doesn't want to condone blatant theft.

I am taking that as a 'no', unless informed otherwise.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Robert

24-04-07, 09:27 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Robert Click to send private message to Robert Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
16. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #15
 
   I would not like to side with the law breakers but perhaps on something like Utube it would be best to just not take any action, seeing jerky little episodes from videos does not really threaten any ones copyright.
I certainly sympathise with Gilbert and Sullivan whose work was widely pirated in America during the Nineteenth century.
Incidentally dance is quite a difficult area. Some years ago my wife and I wrote a book on folkdance and included instructions for several dances. Our publishers were approached by someone who claimed to have collected one of the dances in Scotland and to hold copyright, it seemed to me selfish as we argued the as a traditional dance it was in the public domain and it was accepted, but it shows how problems can arise. Cecil Sharpe made a fortune out of the traditional Shephards Hey tune.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

24-04-07, 10:13 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
18. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #16
 
   >I would not like to side with the law breakers but perhaps
>on something like Utube it would be best to just not take
>any action, seeing jerky little episodes from videos does
>not really threaten any ones copyright.

Thye might be jerky today but technology moves on and that won't be the case for long. It's stealing others hard graft.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

24-04-07, 10:30 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
20. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #15
 
   >>
>>YouTube is a nightmare with much ripped off material. Some
>>studios are taking them through the courts and rightly so I
>>think.
>>I'm interested in wider views on this because it's a
>>headache frankly... one wants to cover what is happening but
>>one doesn't want to condone blatant theft.
>
>I am taking that as a 'no', unless informed otherwise.

I can't see how people easily differentiate between content which is legal and content which is not.

Stollen snips of video might be easily sussed perhaps. But I don't think its exact.

What about video taken illegally? Do you know the video you are enjoying was taken against the will of the participants or company? Proper videos square things with participants and companies and get releases etc.

For the life of me I don't see how we police it properly and I suspect there would be a steady stream of blatantly stollen clips and posters saying "Sorry - I saw other posted YouTube clips and thought it would be fine..."

I think we all ought to be more aware of the provenance of goodies and not encourage what is casual stealing. It's not a victim less crime either - people will stop doing goodies if they can't recover their investment.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
gunleik

25-04-07, 00:18 AM (BST)
Click to EMail gunleik Click to send private message to gunleik Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
21. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #20
 
   LAST EDITED ON 25-04-07 AT 01:45 AM (GMT (ST))
 
Hi.
First post... eh... risky.

But!

As a person who have lived from intellectual rights all my life, this is an interesting discussion.

Youtube can be considered two ways for me:

1.
These guys steal my work

2.
These guys promote my work and give me new work

Have to explain a bit. Professionally I am a composer - and for the last few years a video/film producer, too.

This means I have quite a significant interest in "intellectual rights management".

My point is short:
Youtube deliver media in such a quality so that I get annoyed by seeing/hearing my own work out there.

This have two implications
I get to meet a "new" audience, which wouldn't pay to see/hear what I do anyway. Some of those actually choose to pay to see/hear what I really do -

For the rest... well they wouldn't buy it anyway.

To me Youtube is mostly good, and partly really bad.
My union really hates it!

But if I was to follow my union rules, I would never be in a position to get work.

Youtube mostly distributes "information about information", not the real stuff. It's like a preview on iTunes. You can listen, but not really hear. Thus, I find it... mostly good.

just to be specific, intellectual rights have been my sole income for the last 17 years. Not more, but still not less...

Just my 2c

Gunleik


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

25-04-07, 04:44 AM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
22. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #21
 
  
I'm not surprised that some artists, for whatever reason, see some upside in YouTube. And there is the whole movement around Creative Commons etc.

If owners decide to release material or turn a blind eye that's their prerogative. But note the *their* in that - nobody else can assume it for them. But the trouble is that those who take material assume its fine and don't bother with anybodies ownership and seeing if it is OK. I don't know one professional UK dance photographer that is happy to see their work stollen - and yet it happens all the time. The routine institutionalisation of theft as socially acceptable is very worrying I think.



  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ingve

25-04-07, 07:55 AM (BST)
Click to EMail ingve Click to send private message to ingve Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
23. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #22
 
   Hi there,

this turned out to a lively discussion.

I think anyonoe who wanted could make their pointe.

It is obvously such complicated and emotional subject that any agreement between the ones duscussing on how to actually relate to the fact that youtube and similar is here to stay, does not have a place on this board.


Take care

Ingve


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

25-04-07, 08:08 AM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
24. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #23
 
  
There is room for all shades of opinion on the board and also debate. Seldom do we all agree and it would be boring if we did. But we do need policy at times and boards will all be different. At least our policy at the moment does not encourage the ripping off of material no matter what the temptation.

I do acknowledge that YouTube is here at stay. But so are taxes, porn and guns and we don't all wholeheartedly embrace them.

It might be that we find some way that allows us to cover YouTube - I'd like to in a way because its what a sizable proportion of people like looking at and its a visual art after all. But I can't easily shake off the view that stealing, no matter how nicely done and with whatever great intent (or not!) is still stealing.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ingve

25-04-07, 08:41 AM (BST)
Click to EMail ingve Click to send private message to ingve Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
25. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #24
 
   Sorry, I was probably not clear enough.

I am not having any problem with the policy!

I do not know how to "civilize" youtube!

But I (absolutely personal) would love to find a discussion where a dealing with the opportunities in youtube rather than against or pro. But this is, I admit, hard to find and I am happy you engage yourself with so much passion.

I am happy we do not have to discuss taxes, porn or guns. It is a ballet/dance board. (if I am not completely misstaken )


Ingve


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
DaveM

25-04-07, 08:55 AM (BST)
Click to EMail DaveM Click to send private message to DaveM Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
26. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #25
 
   similar arguments rebounded around the web and newspapers about MP3 file sharing (Napster most notably). Many young, up and coming bands, especially those unsigned, saw it as a great way to get their tunes 'out there' and so find an audience who WOULD buy their commercial releases (a bit like, er, radio!); the monolithic super-labels and mega-bands all hated it, seeing it as a loss of income, rather than as a marketing tool. Of course, what spoiled it was dummies buying an album or acquiring a pre-release promo, putting it all up on a file sharing network, and then everyone downloading that and not paying for it (theft in other words).

Seems YouTube now the new napster for the video age!


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Robert

25-04-07, 05:57 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Robert Click to send private message to Robert Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
27. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #26
 
   Perhaps we should all pretend it does not exist


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Bruceadmin

25-04-07, 06:49 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Bruce Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
28. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #27
 
   >Perhaps we should all pretend it does not exist

Perhaps we might all be better differentiating between right and wrong in a public place.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Robert

26-04-07, 03:05 PM (BST)
Click to EMail Robert Click to send private message to Robert Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
29. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #28
 
   I met my model this morning (the one featured sort of singing and moving on Utube!) and congratulated her on her entry. I also mentioned the unease expressed on balleco about Utube. She and several younger people involved in the performing were rather dismissive of the argument that Utube broadcasts without permission were wrong. It seems that many of the younger generation feel that it offers a useful free service and is some sort of a blow against restrictive capitalism. I was quite shocked at being portrayed yet again as a right wing old fogey. Perhaps I should have kept quiet and pretended it did not exist as I suggested earlier.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
ian_palmermoderator

26-04-07, 03:22 PM (BST)
Click to EMail ian_palmer Click to send private message to ian_palmer Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
30. "RE: Youtube links?"
In response to message #0
 
   Further up the thread Ingve mentions that it is hard to find good discussions about the positive uses of YouTube. For everyone's interest therefore I post details of Doug Fox's "Great Dance Weblog" which I link to occasionally on BlogWatch. Fox is a great fan of YouTube and writes much about its uses and benefits.

http://greatdance.com/danceblog/


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

 
Questions or problems regarding this bulletin board should be directed to Bruce Marriott