Is linking to Youtube and/or Google Video allowed? As you’re probably aware, both services contain a mix of public domain/“legal” videos and copyrighted/“illegal” videos. I don’t think that we as SDMB posters should be put in the position of having to make descisions about which are which. Therefore, IMHO there should be a blanket policy on whether linking to these sites is allowed or not.
I know the SDMB mods and admins take a conservative approach to this topic and generally err on the side of caution in questionable cases. However, I don’t think linking to an episode of Full House on Youtube is the same as “providing information on how to break the law” (e.g. telling people how to pirate music, etc.). I liken it to the policy on song lyrics. We are not allowed to post complete song lyrics, but we may link to sites that have the lyrics (which may or may not be “legal”).
NatPubRadio did a story the other day about YouTube. A YouTube spokesman said they had no way of knowing what was clean and what was pirated. However, any time they get a complaint about copyright, they immediately take down the offending video. That may not be enough to ease your worries, but it’s a piece of the puzzle.
I would like to see any links to videos be clearly labled as such.Also any other links that open to something that isn’t just a plain old static web page. Gets annoying to click on a vaguely described or labeled link only to have a video, sound file, or PDF open up. Come on, people. A little warning, please.
…and that goes for any link, as far as I’m concerned. There have been times when clicking without being careful (mea culpa) on something that seemed fairly innocuous, but turned out to be www. ididdlelittleboys .com or something, now duly logged in my workplaces’ internet monitoring software. :smack:
We would hope all of our members would be considerate of one another and label their links for work safety, family.child viewing, whatever. BTW, we are not considered a “family safe” site and do not pretend to be so.
As for sites such as YouTube we can in no way be responsible for what is placed there nor can we be arbiters of what is violation of copyright or not; that’s for them to say. Since YouTube is now affiliated with ABC/Disney I would think they would be much more careful.
The big studios recently complained to them about copyright violations concerning old cartoons on the site. They instantly removed not only copyright cartoons but also many that were in the public domain and even short excerpts, which are permissible under Fair Use provisions in the law. Cartoon aficionados have now mostly switched to DailyMotion, a far more forgiving site.
I know that Ikarus (Wolfgang Stindl) has placed his videos on Google Video himself, because he has posted about it in his official forums, and his video page links to the google video for Morning Meditation. I would posit that this may also be the case with other videos found on Google.
Seconding the suggestion, with a variant to recommend: If the link is to a file (PDF, video, or whatever else) in excess of some number, I’d suggest 500KB as a fair break point, a warning should be posted.
At the other site where I’m on staff, members regularly link to Youtube videos, and we have a fairly strong copyright rule. Staff monitoring them find that the vast majority (~95%) are home videos, promo clips, or other material copyrighted only under the broad definition that says anything you produce belongs to you copyright-wise until you deal with it otherwise. (In other words, while legal copyright may belong to the person filming the 18-year-olds clowning, he’s not apt to sue for a copyright violation.) While we did delete the few clearly-copyright links, given what’s been said about the new Youtube policies in this thread, I think staff can deem Youtube links “safe” under the Reader’s copyright policy. However, I would like to see them flagged with a warning.
While I do agree on the issues of linking to media/PDF files, it seems to me that that’s more of an etiquette issue than board rules (i.e. bannable offenses).
I appreciate the mods and admins considered response on the Youtube and Google Video question. As already mentioned, linking to them in other places is already very ubiquitous. Aside from moral and ethical issues, the response of The Dope has always been that they need to err on the side of caution to prevent from being sued. Especially true when this board’s finances were entirely subsidized by the Reader, it was always assumed to be the case that a significant lawsuit due to somehow aiding and abetting copyright violation would essentially kill the board.
With the current status of YouTube on the world wide web (and for a lesser part GV), this scenario is completely laughable. Even YouTube isn’t getting sued over these videos. For the most part, they’re just actively taking down the videos as soon as they’re notified about them.
This is not quite accurate. The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) says that ISPs only have to respond if the copyright owner files a complaint. If you or I were to tell them about copyrighted material they would not have to do anything and I would bet that they would not in fact do anything.
This is in some ways understandable, since it would put the onus of investigation on them and leave them wide open to abusive notices. However, finding the actual copyright owner is difficult for you and me as well, so obvious infractions may go untouched.
This is a huge problem. I totally disagree with Polycarp as to the magnitude of it. With millions of clips, it may be possible that many or most are of private postings. But just by sheer numbers, there are also millions of clips of tv programs, movies, concerts, and other copyrighted public performances. They do not constitute Fair Use, given any understanding of the subject I have. And they are often likely to be the ones most passed around, at least if the unscientific sample of those I’ve seen given here is any indication.
Perhaps mod notification is all that can be done until some sort of legal position sorts itself out, as it must fairly soon. This puts a burden on the mods that will undoubtedly lead to ill will, but at least it gives the Café Society mods an advantage in the who gets pitted most standings.
Wait a minute. The Reader and the staff here can in no way be held responsible for what our members put on this site, be it links or anything else.
I also point out that we cannot vet YouTube or any other site in cyberspace for their policies re content.
The real responsibility lies with our users.
Think about what you post here. Think about what links you leave here. Remember that other people read this board from many different places, some private, some public. To go to an old oft-used phrase, don’t put anything here you wouldn’t mind seeing on a billboard right outside your house. With your picture on it.
The standard “two-click” rule for material that is NSFW applies, as always. All such links to these sites should take at least two clicks to get to objectionable material and should be clearly labeled before the first click.
It’s up to YouTube and every other site in cyberspace that features such materal to clear their material. It’s not our job to make that judgment call.