Dispatch Claims YouTube Video Theft « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion

Dispatch Claims YouTube Video Theft

[33 posts] [15 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 1 year ago by th0m
Latest reply from Walker

Tags:

12 Next »

th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM

Scott on Twitter hipped me to to links:

http://www.lostremote.com/2011/01/06/newspaper-removes-homeless-voice-youtube-clip/

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/01/05/live-chat-about-golden-voiced-homeless-man.html

[Doral Chenoweth] I post all my videos to dispatch.com. They are actually copyrighted by the Dispatch, but people steal them and put them on YouTube. It's wrong, but there isn't much we can do about it yet.

This seems rather bewildering because arguably had it not been on YouTube, it wouldn't have gone viral...

So I'm waiting for a few things:

1. A police report from the Dispatch about the theft, or more importantly, some kind of monetary value as to the damages.

2. For the Dispatch to see the web as a customer service medium instead of some kind of rogue newspaper a friend is making that occasionally does things that piss them off.

3. For their website not to be an ADA violation of awful design.

4. A real debate on the actual topic of intellectual property. I mean if they really wanted to protect their property, why did they broadcast it publicly?

5. A listing of what materials the Dispatch has actually contributed to the public domain (my guess, nothing).

What do you think?

Posted 1 year ago #
cc

Login to Send PM

I guess this seems pretty clear. If it is copyrighted by the Dispatch then it is their right to take it down, especially since they did not post it to Youtube.

Yes, it would not have gone viral if it had not been posted on Youtube, but it is still property of the Dispatch.

Posted 1 year ago #
Twixlen
Westgate, Columbus
Login to Send PM

What I don't understand is why doesn't the Dispatch have a You Tube channel? It's nonsense that they haven't embraced that level of media.

I get trying to drive page views to their home page, but I totally agree that if the video hadn't been on YouTube, it would never have become the same level of viral sensation.

Posted 1 year ago #
EmZeeGee
Clintonville
Login to Send PM

Twixlen wrote >>
What I don't understand is why doesn't the Dispatch have a You Tube channel? It's nonsense that they haven't embraced that level of media.
I get trying to drive page views to their home page, but I totally agree that if the video hadn't been on YouTube, it would never have become the same level of viral sensation.

This.

The Poynter Institute, a professional development institution for practicing journalists (and quite renowned in the field)wrote a blog post saying it would've been better to capitalize on the viral energy rather than trying to redirect it:

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/media-lab/social-media/113587/columbus-dispatch-pulls-homeless-voice-video-off-youtube/

Posted 1 year ago #
th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM

Adam also had another link:

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/media-lab/social-media/113587/columbus-dispatch-pulls-homeless-voice-video-off-youtube/

I think they may well not want a YouTube video because (arguably) their are readily available tools for "stealing" YouTube videos, plus then at least some control is then exerted by YouTube.

I also think had it been on an official YouTube channel, it *also* wouldn't have gone viral... about the only thing I've learned from several internet culture conferences is that someone *unrelated* to you has to validate the worth of something, or otherwise be trying to draw attention to a meme, completely independently before whatever magic is to happen.

This also reminds me sort of a story in a Seattle newspaper about a guy dying from a perforated colon because he was trying to have sex with a horse. They were really conflicted because it was the widest read story they had ever published, but not exactly something they wanted to have that distinction.

Truth is controlling digital media is pretty much impossible. The new Intel chip with DRM built in? Won't work. There is only one example I know of that sort of works, and that is DirecTV, and only because they outspent the pirates, or the pirates started using terrestrial sources instead. Maybe Hulu because they constantly chunk the stream, but people are just hacking the browser / Flash plugin to get at that stuff too. The only way to control digital content is to provide two-pass shared secrets like your bank, but also with the media itself re-encrypted for each playback, specifically for the authorized customer, and only if the keys haven't been compromised, but something like that is pretty much immune from ever going viral.

Posted 1 year ago #
th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM

EmZeeGee -- you saw that too! Hahah, but yes I agree the concept of trying to control it is arguably what copyright is about, but seems incompatible with this situation, at least to me.

Posted 1 year ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

Looks like the video has been pulled by The Dispatch:

Get the Video Widget

Posted 1 year ago #
melikecheese
Merion Village
Login to Send PM

I think in this case, since the video went all viral and big things happened, Dispatch should have just let it slide and moved on, now they just look like dopey jerks.

Posted 1 year ago #
geedeck
Witalian Willage
Login to Send PM

There's no way in hell this would have gone viral w/o Youtube. How did I first find out about this? From a video game developer (for Irrational) in Boston who I follow. Next place I saw it was from the community at Shacknews.

I have no idea how the game of telephone played to where it make it to Remo in Boston, but still. Dispatch = super pooper heads. Just get a freaking Youtube channel of your own and post it there, oh and step 4) profi$.

Posted 1 year ago #
Cookie
Flyntonville
Login to Send PM

We're gonna make you work for your dollar, Columbus Dispatch.

Posted 1 year ago #
Twixlen
Westgate, Columbus
Login to Send PM

This was just tweeted out --
http://blog.dispatch.com/blog-36/

January 7, 2011
The story behind our asking YouTube to take down our video
There's been quite a bit of discussion about our decision to ask YouTube to take down the link for our video of the homeless man with the "golden voice." Like others, we must protect our copyrighted material, and we did so in this case.

.....

Posted 1 year ago #
th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM

Saw a transient tweet that the new channel may well be http://www.youtube.com/user/TheColumbusDispatch or some url like that. So that's cool!

I think legally, arguably, it is their right, and perhaps something I guess even their obligated to do if they're serious about protecting their copyright. However, it is *effectively* a form a censorship, and I wonder if the issue, if it were to allowed to continue to spread, could lead to more global awareness of the issue.

Then again it may well be a zero sum kind of thing, I'll continue to bitch for no real good reason, and if there's no such thing as bad PR, then it is all good. Perhaps when they make their channel and make an official video, then at least the authenticity of the original message will be retained.

Posted 1 year ago #
EmZeeGee
Clintonville
Login to Send PM

I don't think there's any argument that it wasn't their material, and that the Dispatch didn't have the exclusive rights to it. And "censorship" is way too strong a word (and the incorrect one). Dispatch videos aren't the only mode of speech available to us.

My point is correctly summed up in this:

melikecheese wrote >>
I think in this case, since the video went all viral and big things happened, Dispatch should have just let it slide and moved on, now they just look like dopey jerks.

Posted 1 year ago #
paktinat
WP
Login to Send PM

melikecheese wrote >>
now they just look like dopey jerks.

I've just run across this:

I usually ignore what's written in the Other Paper. After all, its readership is insignificant, and the work is typically biased and increasingly weak. But a piece in today's edition reached new lows, in my opinion.

- Ben Marrison, Editor Dispatch.
http://blog.dispatch.com/blog-36/2010/10/lazy_biased_reporting_makes_me.shtml#more

Jerk indeed.

Posted 1 year ago #
th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM

is back up! http://www.youtube.com/user/TheColumbusDispatch

Posted 1 year ago #
Bear
The woods
Login to Send PM

Really cogent article on the future of newspapers in the internet era, from the LRB:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n24/john-lanchester/let-us-pay

Posted 1 year ago #
cc

Login to Send PM

I am sure that 'going viral' was not the aim of the Dispatch multimedia editor who made the video and posted it on the Dispatch site. He said he had sat on the video for 5 weeks and then posted it on a 'slow news day'. I think it would be a good idea for some media to watermark their videos though.

Posted 1 year ago #
GW_Justice
Grandview Hts.
Login to Send PM

I just thought about what a media jackpot this story hits.

The photographer from the Dispatch, a newspaper, normally takes photos but instead made a video about a homeless guy named Ted Williams (a name associated with a sport that is on TV). Ted is a guy who is down on his luck, a common theme in movies. He is also a former radio talent. The video is posted to the website of the newspaper, but gets copied (Internet infringement) to YouTube. It goes viral and the story is big on every medium possible (I think there were people using Morse code to spread this story).

Communication majors will be using this story for their Thesis papers for the next five years.

Posted 1 year ago #
JonMyers
HCMC ✈
Login to Send PM

GW I agree communications majors will be using this in their Thesis papers in five years.

Additionally business majors will point to this in their papers.

Posted 1 year ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

I need to give Michael a call to hear more about this whole ordeal...

http://twitter.com/fricto/status/22704555884023808

Posted 1 year ago #